For the Brits: When will BREXIT referendum happen ?

[Laphroaig]

I read a quote about the snp the other day on that subject.

"They're working away to get a 2nd referendum to stay in a union, so they can work away at getting a 2nd referendum to leave a union".

something along those lines.
Amused me.

Nothing would surprise me from them, but let's not forget, the SNP's reason for existence is to see an independent Scotland. For them to give up on that would be like the Green party coming out in favour of coal power stations. Irony is that if Scotland ever did become independent, once the euphoria wore off the SNP would soon be deposed for their own incompetent governance. An independent Scotland would see the death of the SNP in the same way UKIP have shrunk in the wake of the EU referendum.

[Laphroaig]

And you have to ask?

Yes, as all this was completely predictable. Did you and all the other Brexiteers honestly think it was just a case of saying "bye bye EU" and that would be it, job done? Of course the EU was going to look after its own members interests first and guess what, they've proved better at it than us. What's worrying me is that we've made an arse of this deal and yet somehow people still believe these same idiots can negotiate better deals with all those other countries we need to trade with. Be afraid, be very afraid...

[peejaye]

Yes, as all this was completely predictable. Did you and all the other Brexiteers honestly think it was just a case of saying "bye bye EU" and that would be it, job done? Of course the EU was going to look after its own members interests first and guess what, they've proved better at it than us. What's worrying me is that we've made an arse of this deal and yet somehow people still believe these same idiots can negotiate better deals with all those other countries we need to trade with. Be afraid, be very afraid...

:smh
It's all that bastard Jeremy Corbyns fault.

[Laphroaig]

:smh
It's all that bastard Jeremy Corbyns fault.

Nope, while I agree he's completely useless, he's had nothing to do with the negotiations so far and if he had we'd probably be even deeper in the shit. All evidence points to the fact that Corbyn is quite happy being leader of the opposition, but would shit himself if he became PM and actually had to deal with Brexit or any other responsibility, directly.

[Laphroaig]

:smh
It's all that bastard Jeremy Corbyns fault.

Ok then, why is it all Corbyn's fault when:

1. The referendum was promised by Cameron as the Tory Party were afraid of losing votes and seats to UKIP.
2. Cameron assumed remain would win, therefore put no plans in place in case of a leave vote.
3. Brexit negotiations have been conducted solely though the Government (ie Tory party), and some believe May has had complete control over them.
4. Corbyn and the rest of parliament have been shut out completely until now.

:shrug ??

[broncofan]

He was being sarcastic when he said it was all Corbyn's fault. You said it wasn't his fault but called Corbyn useless. Peejaye's a supporter of Corbyn so perhaps he didn't agree that he's useless. As for me, I'm just clearing up the miscommunication with no opinions whatsoever about it;)

[Stavros]

It would be easy to regard Tuesday's debates and votes on Brexit as a farce. The one and only deal that was rejected by the Commons is not so dead after all, because Theresa May has been given the authority by Parliament to go back to Brussels to re-negoiate the terms of withdrawal, with the express hope that the 'Backstop' can be removed and replaced with an 'alternative arrangement'. When asked what this means, Theresa May offers a mix of options, some political, some 'technological' but is not more specific than that. The view that what May was doing was 'taking back control' of her party is strong because a few hours before she began the debates, she spoke to Jean-Claude Juncker on the phone who told her there was nothing to re-negotiate.

I offer a different view, on the basis that I am probably wrong, but regard these events from an 'alternative perspective'.
It begins with the argument that because Theresa May voted to Remain in the EU, she cannot be trusted to deliver the result of the EU Referendum -this is the view voiced by Telegraph readers who variously call her useless, incompetent, deceitful, and of course a traitor. In fact Theresa May went out of her way to adopt the Brexit cause but did so by presenting her Red Lines and her strategy as one that the hard line Brexiteers in her party would accept, and brought into her Cabinet in 2016 promnent Leave campaigners, namely Boris Johnson, Liam Fox, Michael Gove, Andrea Leadsom and David Davis who was even put in charge of the negotiating process. It has been said that the Brexiteers were instantly sidelined by May and the civil servant Ollie Robins (also from the 'deep state' or the 'Establishment' if you prefer) though it seems in two years David Davis did not complain and while he and Johnson resigned in protest at the draft of what is now the EU-UK Withdrawal Agreement, the other Leave campaigners did not.

The key point is that again and again May denied there would be a 'soft Brexit' the UK would be leaving the Single Market and the Customs Union, would not pay vast sums to the EU and would leave the jurisdiction of the European Court of Justice. Just as even on Wednesday she claimed Parliament had voted to prevent a 'No Deal' exit from the EU, but could not rule it out altogether if there is no support for any deal.

But, does this mean that in fact Theresa May can only get a change to the text of the Withdrawal Agreement, if at all, by asking the EU to remove references to the Backstop by retaining the UK's full membership of the Customs Union -but not the Single Market- through the transition period 2019-2020 when negotiations on long term trade take place? On the one hand it solves the problem of trade between Ireland and the EU via the UK, but on the other hand would rile he hard liners seeing in this 'alternative arrangement' a sell-out that is 'Brexit in name only'.
And then, if the hard liners say they can't vote for it, May could whip the old one out of the hat and say, well vote for this one! A lot depends on whether or not she can persuade Labour to support her in order to out-vote the hard liners, as the alternaive is a No Deal exit and few other than the fanatics want that.

And Labour could change tactics, because while Corbyn's Brexit position has been to retain membership of 'a' customs union, he has presented his as an option to explore after leaving rather than as a term of withdrawal -were May to get a Customs Union option to replace the Backstop, Corbyn could accept it as would many Labour MPs, and the final vote in February would end this phase of Brexi to the satisfaction of the Remainers in the Conservative Party, the Labour Party and most of British business. It is also hard to see how the DUP could oppose it as a Customs Union arrangement would retain an open border and satisfy the majority in Northern Ireland who voted to Remain in the EU.

Would the hard liners be so outraged that they left the party? Mark Francois is one who might, not sure about Jacob Rees-Mogg, but if they are isolated behind the ultra position of No Deal their absence might not matter anyway.

The other alternative is that the EU rejects any suggestion from Theresa May, she returns empty handed to either suggest extending Article 50 to give the government more time to prepare -in practice the provisions of the amendment in the name of Yvette Cooper that was rejected on Tuesday- or there will be an exit from the EU on the 29th March 2019 without a deal, but with Nessun Dorma playing in the background, though the markets won't open until April 1st.

One final thought on this peculiar state of affairs. The UK and Ireland have enjoyed the freee movement of people since the 1920s, codified in 1953 as the Common Travel Area, and this arrangement has not been prejudiced by Brexit, so that when Theresa May declares that free movement from the EU to the UK will end, she should add, 'but not with regard to Ireland'. That this stands as a contradiction that is acceptable is a good example of the stupidity of Brexit, for whatever happens with the Backstop, the UK will, because it must, negotiate a Customs Union arrangement with the EU. In 2020, or 2021 or 2025 we will be where we are now, only the clothes will be different, and the words will have changed.

But as I say, I am probably wrong.

Interesting article on Ireland and free movement here-
https://www.irishtimes.com/news/ireland/irish-news/how-brexit-could-impact-on-immigration-rules-and-the-common-travel-area-1.3776100

Corbyn's Brexit in name only-
https://www.ft.com/content/d7673a26-1af2-11e8-956a-43db76e69936

[Laphroaig]

He was being sarcastic when he said it was all Corbyn's fault. You said it wasn't his fault but called Corbyn useless. Peejaye's a supporter of Corbyn so perhaps he didn't agree that he's useless. As for me, I'm just clearing up the miscommunication with no opinions whatsoever about it;)

That'll teach me for not bothering to read through all of the thread...:)

In any case, the point remains. While the blame for this mess lies with Cameron and May, combined with all the Brexshitters who disappeared rather than take responsibility and demand to be part of the process, (Farage MEP anyone), I still think we'd be in an even worse state if Comrade Corbyn was in charge...

[broncofan]

That'll teach me for not bothering to read through all of the thread...:)

In any case, the point remains. While the blame for this mess lies with Cameron and May, combined with all the Brexshitters who disappeared rather than take responsibility and demand to be part of the process, (Farage MEP anyone), I still think we'd be in an even worse state if Comrade Corbyn was in charge...
I've had some harsh words about Corbyn but I don't want to fall into a trap of picking sides or just condemning someone regardless of their actions. I agree this is not his show, but I'm not sure what would have taken place if he were completely in charge. He didn't call the referendum, but what terms are the Europeans obligated to accept given that Britain is leaving the union? I don't think he'd achieve a better result not because there's a ton of blame to be handed out about the negotiation of Brexit; Britain simply has no bargaining power. I haven't been following too closely so I'll accept correction if that initial impression is contradicted.

There are reasons people on the left have been concerned about economic unions and in general the loosening of trade restrictions, but we've also seen similar biases on the right where nationalism and protectionism are popular. At least on the left the skepticism is about control over the conditions of work and the prioritizing of quality of life over total productivity where the right tends to be more motivated by xenophobia and the homogeneity of their culture.

I wish for more pragmatism from politicians; more contingent decision-making; less polarization; and people who are better able to respond to the exigencies of the moment. While I can see the pitfalls of economic unionization, in this case, isolation will be far worse.

[broncofan]

And Labour could change tactics, because while Corbyn's Brexit position has been to retain membership of 'a' customs union, he has presented his as an option to explore after leaving rather than as a term of withdrawal -were May to get a Customs Union option to replace the Backstop, Corbyn could accept it as would many Labour MPs, and the final vote in February would end this phase of Brexi to the satisfaction of the Remainers in the Conservative Party, the Labour Party and most of British business.

Once May and Corbyn figure out whether retaining membership in the customs union but leaving the single market is the ideal objective, what levers do they have to bring this about other than asking for it? Is there any indication that the EU would accept withdrawal from the single market but continued membership in the customs union?

[Stavros]

Once May and Corbyn figure out whether retaining membership in the customs union but leaving the single market is the ideal objective, what levers do they have to bring this about other than asking for it? Is there any indication that the EU would accept withdrawal from the single market but continued membership in the customs union?

We are currently paralysed by the terms of withdrawal from membership of the EU, with the terms of renewal when we leave still not clear. In either case, the Customs Union, because it integrates EU markets in the 'frictionless trade of goods', presents itself as a necessity because whether the UK is in or out of the EU British and EU companies trade with each other. This is why a 'No Deal' or 'Hard Brexit' worries so many people as it instantly throws into question the flow of goods into and out of the UK, although the Hard Liners call this 'Project Fear' because they claim that even though the UK will become a 'third country' outside the EU, in practical terms nothing will change. That the UK government has not made sufficient plans for a No Deal scenario is evident (the Foreign Secretary Jeremy Hunt has admitted this), that stockpiling is taking place is also evident, just as motor manufacturers who normally shut down for a fortnight in the summer have brought this forward and will close for at least a fortnight beginning on the 1st of April, the first working day outside the EU -their concern being that parts used in the European supply chain will not be there to maintain production. 99% of the insulin used by Type 1 Diabetics is imported from the EU.

Thus hard liners argue this is a strong bargaining position for the UK and that the EU is merely playing hardball and will concede at the 11th hour to guarantee some sort of deal that allows the UK to leave the EU without disrupting trade. From this perspective, because Northern Ireland is in the UK but shares a border with the EU, the 'backstop' is closely related to 'the' as well as 'a' Customs Union, but the EU is insiting that the 'backstop' is a guarantee of frictionless trade with Ireland that also maintains the inegrity of the Good Friday Agreement, and is only designed to be used if talks on trade fail.

Although this means that Jeremy Corbyn's customs union issue will be part of the 'renewal' talks, it was always going to be, so he gets no full marks for being clever. Labour and the Conservatives have been united in their commitment to take the UK out of the EU, both parties supported the Referendum, and as a result of it, the Withdrawal Act and the invocation of Article 50. The only way in which Labour has been out of the loop is due to the fact that both Theresa May and Jeremy Corbyn are obstinate people, and neither wants to be seen to forming the partnership that in fact was needed if the UK was to present a united front to the EU in negotiating the withdrawal agreement.

May as I pointed out earlier had to mollify the hard liners in her own party, making common cause with Labour would have suggested she wanted a 'soft Brexit in name only', while Corbyn for ideological reasons does not make common cause with Tories, not even sharing a public platform with them if he can avoid it. And yet, had Theresa May and Jeremy Corbyn worked together on the negotiations, the triumph and the failure would have been equally shared, and the extremists marginalized.

So it is still possible to find ways of resolving the problem of the backstop, and thus possible to leave without much fuss. As for the longer term, the indicators are not good. In additional to the seasonal shutdown in auto I referred to earlier, long term investment in motor manufacturing in the UK has been hammered, the hammer blows of a changing market, and of Brexit combined, as the FT reported in the last 24 hours:

The Society of Motor Manufacturers and Traders warned that a no-deal Brexit would be “catastrophic” for the industry as it outlined that carmakers and their suppliers had announced new investment in the UK worth £588m last year, down 47 per cent compared with 2017. It also revealed that production was at its lowest level in five years, with 1.52m cars made in UK factories in 2018. “If this is Project Fear, then we’re doing a good impression of it being a reality,” said Mike Hawes, chief executive of the SMMT, referring to the phrase coined by Eurosceptics to dismiss predictions of negative economic consequences stemming from Brexit.
https://www.ft.com/content/b02e7342-24a2-11e9-8ce6-5db4543da632

Boris Johnson continues to cling to the argument that the Germans sell 750,000 cars a year to the UK and will not want to jeapordize that market, but is either ignorant of or avoids the reality that the same German auto firms sold 6 million cars in the Chinese market in one quarter of 2018-
https://www.fleeteurope.com/en/manufacturers/global/features/why-china-destiny-german-carmakers

The changes taking place in the auto industry reflect a long term transition away from gas and diesel toward electric vehicles, but Brexit has fed into this with the lack of clarity on the withdrawal but also the terms of trade the UK will sign with the EU when it leaves, thus Jaguar Land Rover is shedding up to 5,000 jobs. In other areas
--Hitachi has withdrawn from investing in a nuclear power plant in North Wales, there are doubts about the Chinese and French invesment in a renewal of the Hinckley Point nuclear plant
--investment in the Swansea Tidal Lagoon was dropped last year.
--The London Stock Exchange lost 12% of its value in 2018
--Barclays Bank has been allowed by the High Court to move €190 billion of its asset to Ireland, which in addition to other examples of 'capital flight' now means something like €800 billion has left the UK since the 2016 Referendum.
https://www.ft.com/content/dbe4fd26-24ac-11e9-8ce6-5db4543da632

--That some of the assets of Somerset Capital Management have also been moved to Ireland is a strange endorsement of one of its managers, Jacob Rees-Mogg, MP, passionate Brexiteer who attempted and failed to remove Theresa May from the leadership of the Conservative Party and claims predictions of chaos and economic decline after Brexit is 'Projet Fear'.
--Another such fanatic, John Redwood MP advised his investors in Charles Stanley not to even invest in the UK as a result of Brexit. I think he once suggested it might take 50 years for the UK to regain its position as one of the strongest economies in the world.

[filghy2]

....oh; if you're looking for someone to argue with; Look elsewhere. There's already one arsehole on here doing that & he's been BLOCKED!

Well thank God you are not that type.
Has there been anyone else in the history of this site who has posted so much on one topic without actually saying anything of substance?

[Laphroaig]

He was being sarcastic when he said it was all Corbyn's fault. You said it wasn't his fault but called Corbyn useless. Peejaye's a supporter of Corbyn so perhaps he didn't agree that he's useless. As for me, I'm just clearing up the miscommunication with no opinions whatsoever about it;)

Corbyn has now moved to back a second referendum vote. Wonder what Peejaye thinks of that?...

[broncofan]

https://twitter.com/classiclib3ral/status/1101850461697654784

A thoughtfully presented argument in favor of Brexit.

[filghy2]

Those dastardly foreigners, working and not working at the same time. No wonder British people can't compete.

[filghy2]

Corbyn has now moved to back a second referendum vote. Wonder what Peejaye thinks of that?...

I wouldn't be surprised if he shifts to UKIP eventually, given that seems more like his natural home.

I was pleasantly surprised by Corbyn's move, given his previous record of determined fence-sitting. He must have come under some heavy internal pressure, and may be worried about the risk of further defections.

[Laphroaig]

I wouldn't be surprised if he shifts to UKIP eventually, given that seems more like his natural home.

I was pleasantly surprised by Corbyn's move, given his previous record of determined fence-sitting. He must have come under some heavy internal pressure, and may be worried about the risk of further defections.

UKIP have all but collapsed following the referendum result in favour of leave. Interesting that with all the chaos and Government delaying tactics over the last 2 years, and the increased support behind a second referendum, there's still no sign of a resurgence from UKIP. Wonder if that decline would be reversed if (as seems likely) there's a delay to Brexit, or (less likely) a second vote.

[broncofan]

I was pleasantly surprised by Corbyn's move, given his previous record of determined fence-sitting. He must have come under some heavy internal pressure, and may be worried about the risk of further defections.
He deserves credit for it but I assume there was a risk of further defections. There have been one or two more I think (Ian Austin comes to mind) and some councilors who have resigned, so there's pressure on him. If I lived there I would want someone to try to move heaven and earth to try to fend off economic disaster.

[broncofan]

I'm just curious what some of those here who are against Brexit would like their representatives in Parliament (or if you're foreign think Parliament should do) to do if you had your way completely?

Is there anyone who thinks that their reps should say, "we had a vote for a non binding referendum, and though the people voted in favour of it, it is only advisory. Parliament is sovereign and after investigating the issue and moving forward in good faith, we cannot implement a soft or hard brexit without doing both immediate and long-term damage to our economy."

Is there anyone who thinks, no second referendum, the first one was advisory and should have at least committed Parliament to look at their options. Now that they've done that, they can make the decision that moving forward with Brexit would harm the UK economy. I mean there are probably good reasons the public doesn't generally negotiate detail laden trade deals and shouldn't make a decision that is so contingent that they couldn't know what they're even voting on in advance of negotiations anyway.

[Stavros]

I voted Remain and think Brexit is the most stupid decision ever made, worse than Suez. But I see no point in a second referendum which would probably produce the same result though with a different margin of victory, but that also depends on a) the polls to believe, and b) the assumption that there will be a high turnout among young people who did not have the right to vote in 2016 and would vote to remain, replacing the Leave voters who have since died.

I think, therefore, the UK should leave, but as I said in earlier posts, the best way to leave was in phases over 2 to 5 or seven years, because while voting to leave was the easy part, producing the mechanism to leave that minimises damage to trade is much harder, and requires more time than Theresa May's government has allowed. There are, even now, too many aspects of trade and law that need to be settled, but while the ERG and others cry 'Treachery' on the basis that a delay to Article 50 and the Withdawal Agreement with the EU keep is in the EU indefinitely, I think the mess merely proves my point that the Government created too narrow a time frame in which to achieve Brexit.

I expect the UK economy to go into recession for at least 10 years after Brexit, and also hope that the terms of trade that the US has offered the UK will be, either rejected outright, or amended so that the food standards issue reflects the requirement that the US meet the standards we have in the UK and the EU. I am not sure about the precise details of 'chlorinated chicken' but am aware that food standards in the US are much lower than they are in the UK because the management of food production is risky -sloppy animal welfare is the reason why so much meat and chicken is covered in faeces that need to be 'washed' in chlorine, though I can't believe this is true of all US products but don't expect organic produce to be exported anyway. I am also surprised if it is true, that food in the US is not properly labelled to tell the customer what proportion of the food contains salt, sugar, fats, and so on, while also identifyig the origin of the product.

One of the remarkable options in the terms of trade gives the US unlimited access to the UK's market, with the rider that the US may decide if the UK can trade with countries that for some reason would prejudice US trade, which has been argued means the UK won't be able to trade with China if the US says no -but why would the UK, which is leaving the EU because it says it wants to be independent and make its own free trade deals, give up its sovereign right to do so to the USA? As someone in a West Ham t-shirt might say 'Are you avin' a larf, mate?'

The US trade document is here-
https://ustr.gov/sites/default/files/Summary_of_U.S.-UK_Negotiating_Objectives.pdf

[filghy2]

Is there anyone who thinks that their reps should say, "we had a vote for a non binding referendum, and though the people voted in favour of it, it is only advisory. Parliament is sovereign and after investigating the issue and moving forward in good faith, we cannot implement a soft or hard brexit without doing both immediate and long-term damage to our economy."

It would be legally possible to ignore the referendum but I don't think it's politically tenable. It would leave a lot of embittered Brexit voters feeling betrayed by the system and poison UK politics even more than it is now. If the political system is going to ignore a vote because of undesirable consequences then it would be far better to not have the referendum in the first place.

The problem with referenda is that they can only resolve a contentious issue if the result is decisive and there can be no argument about what the people were voting for. The 1975 referendum met these conditions, but the 2016 one did not. A second referendum won't resolve the issue unless it can satisfy these conditions, which means it can't just be a re-run of the 2016 referendum.

[Stavros]

Either this is the momentous week in British politics when the UK moves toward its exit from the EU, or it is another week of uncertain outcomes. The Guardian offers this useful road map (scroll to bottom of the article) the first key vote expected this evening (12 March 2019).

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/mar/08/the-brexit-state-of-play-a-guide-to-next-weeks-crucial-votes

[Jericho]

Christ on a bike!
With the latest defeat, tomorrow's going to be..Interesting!

[Stavros]

Interesting to the point of being bizarre. The Government proposes a motion to rule out No Deal before the 29th March, but when an amendment changes to the wording to remove that speciific date, the Government, having promised its own party a free vote, suddenly imposes a three-line whip to vote against what originally was its own, now amended motion, which it loses, with four Cabinet members abstaining from the vote rather than support the Government (in effect, Theresa May) but have not been sacked, unless, like football fans chanting at the manager of losing team they are to be 'sacked in the morning'. And that followed the surreal moment earlier in the day when the Chancellor of the Exchequer delivered his 'Spring Statement' on the economy in which he warned against a No Deal Brexit which is the default position of...the Government he sits in...

In normal times the Prime Minister would resign, but Theresa Mat is either a fighter, deluded, or a clever politician who spent a lot of the day debating options with MPs from the Democrratic Unionist Party who we now know are desperate for some kind of deal as Northern Ireland faces ruin. If even these obstinate obstacles to Brexit are moving, and if May can persuade enough Labour rebels to do so, she will try for a third time to get the Withdrawal Agreement voted through, though there is a rumour the Speaker will not permit it, if he can.

Thursday's vote (ie later today) will seek a delay to Article 50. In technical terms the legal instruments that accompany Brexit have not been cleared through the House so the argument will be a 'pro forma' exit on the 29th with June 30 the actual 'exit day' -the EU may agree to this, but it is now known they are opposed to any extension of Article 50 if it has no meaningful purpose.

The other gossip is that if these motions and amendments fail, and May after the defeat in effect told the House so what? it's my deal or no deal, the ERG will join Labour to bring a vote of No Confidence in the Government -again!- on the basis that MPs are in such despair, so genuinely scared the voters regard them with contempt May will fall and a General Election be held in, well, May...

Where this leaves the UK with regard to Brexit, the EU Parliamentary Elections in May (does anyone get tired of that word) we will find out as the last bars of this tragic opera play out over the next 7 days.

It's not over until the lady sings, though right now she has lost her voice...

[Stavros]

After the day when four cabinet members preferrd to abstain rather than support their own government and Prime Minister, and were not sacked by her, today broke new records, and for that matter broke into eight pieces at least, the theory and practice of Cabinet Government and Cabinet Collective Responsibility. On the motion to delay Article 50, which the Government won, no less than eight members of the Cabinet voted against the motion -most bizarre of all, the Secretary of State for Exiting the European Union, Stephen Barclay ended the debate with a rousing speech in support of the motion, but then walked through the No lobby to seek to defeat it....

...as for Her Majesty's Loyal Opposition, a Second Referendum was endorsed as Labour Party policy at their 2018 Conference if the Government failed to secure a deal, and Jeremy Corbyn was forced by his own party in Parliament to endorse it last week, yet today, when the motion to secure a Second Referendum was proposed Labour decided to oppose it on the basis 'now is not the time', and it was defeated. I am opposed to a second referendum, but for those who saw it as the only alternative to a failed deal by the Government, this was a betrayal, Labour proving it is incapable of making a coherent decision on Brexit, and further proof that there appears to be no integrated party system in the House of Commons with the exception of the Scottish National Party and the Democratic Unionist Party. Tory and Labour Parties are now just a loose assembly of people who do what they want with no regard for party policy or discipline.

If it was producing results it might not matter, but it is not. The Government will seek agreement from the EU to extend Article 50 June 20 in order to pass the remaining statutory instruments associated with Article 50 that have not cleared Parliament, but we still do not know if they will agree to it, though they might, while we are told the Withdrawal Agreement rejected twice will be voted on a third time next week if The Speaker agrees to allow a failed motion to be brought before the House again, which normally can only be done if there is a substantial change to it. If that fails the Government may seek a two year delay to Brexit, but that is still speculation. Sme chatter suggests the DUP will vote for the Withdrawal Agreement if the Government can find the wording to make the 'Backstop' acceptable, but who knows? So many strange things have happened in the last two weeks, we can't be sure what will happen in the next 48 hours.

[Jericho]

when the motion to secure a Second Referendum was proposed Labour decided to oppose it on the basis 'now is not the time', and it was defeated.

In fairness, they were going on the advice of whomever runs the 'Peoples Vote' campaign ('Peoples' whatever...something else blairites should answer for)!

But beyond that, Indeed...What the fuck is going on!

[Stavros]

In fairness, they were going on the advice of whomever runs the 'Peoples Vote' campaign ('Peoples' whatever...something else blairites should answer for)!

But beyond that, Indeed...What the fuck is going on!

You seriously think Jeremy Corbyn based his decision on the 'People's Vote' campaign? If that were the case why is still leader of the party? It was an opportunity to vote for something many, if not most of the party in Parliament have been calling for -the leadership ducked it at the last moment for the simple reason that they want to see the Government fall and a General Election in May, which is getting more likely by the day.

Today the DUP are in talks with No 10 to find a formula whereby they can support the Prime Minister's 'unacceptable deal', but will the ERG fall into line? I can't imagine Steve Baker or Marc Francois doing it. I am not even sure if the Government can bring the same WA to the Commons for a third time unless it is in some way different from what it was before. Ah well, another week of uncertainty, Jericho. Do you think you should run for Parliament? Could you make a difference?

[Jericho]

You seriously think Jeremy Corbyn based his decision on the 'People's Vote' campaign?

After the failure of his own motion for a 2nd ref recently, I think it was more based on mathematics.


Ah well, another week of uncertainty, Jericho. Do you think you should run for Parliament? Could you make a difference?


ArfArf, Jericho, Minister for Transexual Affairs!

I may have the morals of a dissolute alleycat, but I'm a European alleycat. Electorate be damned, I couldn't work towards taking us out of Europe, so no, I probably couldn't make a difference.

[peejaye]

Well I just got my new passport today, I applied for it three weeks ago. It's got "European Union" on the top line of the front cover! What the fuck is that all about? Does someone know something they haven't shared with the rest of us?:nervous:
Live in hope Jericho!

[Jericho]

HolyKrap, Bercow's thrown a spanner in the works!

(That will piss the DUPs off, They were about to get a fresh bribe, er, i mean, 'incentive').



House of Commons Speaker John Bercow has scuppered any chance of another Commons vote on Theresa May’s Brexit withdrawal agreement before Thursday’s EU summit.

Mr Bercow ruled that the Prime Minister cannot bring her EU withdrawal deal back before MPs unless it is substantially different from the package which was decisively defeated last week.

Mr Bercow’s ruling, announced in an unexpected statement to the Commons, throws a further obstacle in the way of the Prime Minister’s scramble to get a deal agreed by the scheduled date of Brexit on March 29.


https://www.heraldscotland.com/news/17509413.speaker-john-bercow-thwarts-third-vote-on-theresa-mays-brexit-deal-without-substantial-changes/

[Jericho]

Well I just got my new passport today, I applied for it three weeks ago. It's got "European Union" on the top line of the front cover! What the fuck is that all about? Does someone know something they haven't shared with the rest of us?:nervous:
Live in hope Jericho!

Ah, but was it maroon?

Given todays events, I think we're all going to die of old age before we have to start worrying about newblue passports!

[Laphroaig]

Well I just got my new passport today, I applied for it three weeks ago. It's got "European Union" on the top line of the front cover! What the fuck is that all about? Does someone know something they haven't shared with the rest of us?:nervous:
Live in hope Jericho!

They won't start issuing the blue ones until we're actually out of the EU. That's been known for a while and there was an announcement recently that the current ones will remain valid when/if we do leave. So, I'm afraid that unless you lose it you're stuck with it until it expires. Just as well, I need a new one soon and I'm fucked if I'd pay for it twice.

[peejaye]

The new blue non-EU ones will be issued from Oct 2019, mine is maroon and is valid for 10 years.

[Stevie.Thomas]

The thing way people are treating the colour of the passport like its a holy grail. My passport is valid for another 7 years and i dont care about the colour but a guy i work with is changing his when the become available.

[Stavros]

The spiral known as 'Brexit' continues to gyrate, but whereas a corkscrew spirals into the cork of a handsome Burgundy to enrich a meal, Brexit is just spiralling, if not out of control, then into ever deeper depths of absurdity.

Thus,
1) last night the Prime Minister 'addressed the Nation' live on tv -though it was not deemed important enough to interrupt either Coronation Street or Holby City- in which she said that although the British people had voted to leave the EU and her government had established 29th March 2019 as 'Exit Day', she now believed this would not happen, and it is the fault of MPs who refuse to pass the Withdrawal Agreement negotiated between the EU and the UK. She claimed earlier in the Commons that the UK would seek an extension of Article 50 to June 30th but not later than that, but we don't know if the EU will agree to it, and if they don't and the Commons if asked to do so, rejects the WA for a third time, we may find that in fact the UK does leave the EU on the 29th March, but without deal.
But the sight of a Prime Minister blaming everyone but herself for this mess was staggering in its ineptitude, and following her petulant remarks in the Commons earlier in the day about MPs 'navel gazing', even her closest supporters have been shaking their heads in disbelief. Unless she has some secret deal with the EU, she looks to me like a Prime Minister walking the plank with only the deepest ocean before her.

2) For some time, Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn has said the Prime Minister should, like the Four Tops, 'reach out' to the rest of the Commons to obtain a more popuar deal the EU will accept and the Commons pass; yet when Corbyn was invited to No 10 Downing Street for just such an exploration of MPs from across the Commons, he entered the room to find former Labour, now Independent MP Chuka Umunna seated at the table, turned round in disgust, and left, I suppose you might call it 'Jexit'. Reach Out (I'll Not Be there).
That the leader of Her Majesty's Opposition appears to be as stubborn as the Prime Minister, capable of producing instant stasis in an earthquake makes one wonder how either of them have survived this long.
Because nobody else wants their job, nobody wants to be responsible for the Brexit that has dominated our politics for the last two and half years.

3) When the Brexit Party was launched in January and formally registered as a party in February, it was hailed as the new 'UKIP'. Created by Nigel Farage, the fate of the Brexit Party has in just over a month already taken on the fate of UKIP, as the first leader has been forced to resign so the Party is now looking for its new leader (UKIP is currently on its 6th leader in less than 3 years). The leader, a former UKIP 'economics' spokeswoman (please don't laugh) Christine Blaiklck has had some dodgy mates in the past and has agreed to leave.
So, Nigel, why is it that every party you touch falls to pieces? And guess what, Farage wrote an article in the Telegraph saying if the UK does not leave the EU he will tear the Conservative Party 'limb from limb' -er, Nigel, don't exert yourself, just blow hard enough and the Tories will collapse, and while you're at it, blow some smoke up your own arse.

*Nigel Farage is leading the 'People's March' for Brexit, walking from Sunderland to London, or rather, taking buses part of the way -Nigel is in the Comfy Car, if he is ever seen at all- cost of entry onto the March £50. 350 started the March. England has arisen.

[Jericho]

It's not my fault, I'll protect you from those lazy MP's!
May's speech, pretty much!

Hmmm, Jexit (well played, Sir!)
Tho, I prefer "The Squakbox" version.



But a Labour source told the SKWAWKBOX how it all unfolded:


There were two meetings. There was the one with the party leaders – and another one that the Tiggers were invited to.

But the Tiggers turned up at the main meeting and [May adviser] Gavin Barwell thought it would be rude to send them away even though they’d crashed it! Confusion reigned.

The Tiggers aren’t even a party, let alone significant enough to have been there, so Jeremy left. Apparently he didn’t miss anything, it was as vacuous as you’d expect.


https://skwawkbox.org/2019/03/21/why-corbyn-really-walked-out-of-meeting-with-umunna/

[peejaye]

1148860

Cheerio Yvette Cooper, Lisa Nandy & other Elitist cunts, I know YOU know best but it will cost you your jobs :D

[Stavros]

1148860


No policies, no seats, no future. Just another desperate attempt to hang on to €93,000 a year, plus expenses.

[Stavros]

According to the new Prime Minister, the UK will be leaving the EU on the 31st October, 'no ifs, no buts'. So, 99 days to go.
What leaving actually means is open to question, not least because Johnson on the ITV Peston show last week, said that the UK will leave the EU's 'legal formula' on the 31st but operate a 'stand still' approach to the Customs Union and the Single Market for the duration of the 'implementation period' that lasts until the UK has negotiated a free trade agreement with the EU. That sounds to me like the UK remaining in the EU and not being in the EU at the same time, and makes no more sense than Johnson's insistence he can negotiate changes to the existing Withdrawal Agreement which he has said is 'dead', but which also seems to be the basis of the negotiations which in any case the EU say have ended.

Put another way, Boris is saying to the EU 'Give me what I want, or I shall slam the door on the way out', so we need to see who blinks first, if either side blink. On top of that, if Johnson were to be offered something or negotiated a revised deal, it would have to be approved by the 27 Members States of the EU, and the UK Parliament, which suggests 31st October can't be the date if the process of approval is still taking place in Parliament. Boris is in a Box, and he is neither a magician, nor a rabbit.

[filghy2]

The only problem, Stavros, is the refusal of people like you to believe in the Brexit utopia. Don't you know that all will turn out well as long as you believe it will. Don't you know that you can always get what you want if you are determined enough?
Isn't that the substance of Boris's pitch, or have I missed something?

[Stavros]

In practical terms, Brexit has begun: as of the 1st of September, UK Government officials will no longer participate in EU meetings. However, because the UK is still a full member of the EU, decisions which require the agreement of all 28 members will on the UK's behalf be made by Finland-


But the decision leaves the UK government with a reduced influence over new EU legislation, which will affect the UK for some time to come.
Because the UK is still entitled to a vote, the decision on how it should be cast will be delegated by power of attorney to Finland (https://www.independent.co.uk/topic/Finland), which is the current rotating chair of the European Council.

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/boris-johnson-no-deal-brexit-news-eu-meetings-finland-votes-uk-a9072956.html

Isn't independence wonderful?

[Stavros]

MPs will return from their summer holidays next week to spend the last two weeks of this Parliamentary Session. The Prime Minister has advised the Queen to prorogue this session of Parliament on the 14th of September, and to reconvene for her Gracious Speech on the 14th of October.
On one level there is nothing dramatic about this, the current session has been one of the longest, and the government has the right to use the technical measures known as Prorogation in which the Queen formally ends a Session. The timing is what has got everyone into a flap, because the Commons has yet to find a resolution to the endorsement of the Terms of Withdrawal under Article 50 of the Lisbon Treaty that formally ends the first phase of the UK's exit from the EU, to begin the formal negotiations on the trading relationship both desire as the UK becomes an independent state. In addition, there is a conflict in the Commons on the logical position the government finds itself in: if there is no agreement on the Terms of Withdrawal, the UK will leave without a deal at 11pm on the 31st of October, and many MPs want to find a legal way to stop it.

So what Johnson has tried to do is short-circuit Parliamentary procedure to make a No Deal exit on the 31st of October the most obvious means of leaving. He insists he is trying to re-negotiate parts of the existing Terms of Withdrawal, but declared it is dead during his campaign to be leader of the Conservative Party, and the EU has said it is not re-opening negotiations, so one wonders what other than window dressing Johnson thinks he can achieve.

Some might have thought it best to see this Session through the the end of October at which time, if the UK does indeed leave the EU, Parliament could be Prorogued, a new Session begin with a new Queen's Speech setting out the legislative agenda for a new Britain outside the EU. There is also the complication that if the Opposition table a vote of No Confidence and the government loses, a General Election is the logical outcome, but Johnson thinks he will win a No Confidence vote.

Yet another prospect emerges: Johnson gets his way all the way to the 31st October, but loses so many votes on government legislation -his party has a majority of 1, with DUP support- he may be obliged to called a General Election.

One way and another, Brexit has made a complete mess of politics, to the extent that even with announcement today we still have no clear idea what, if anything will happen on the 31st October (the EU is unlikely to offer the UK an extension), we don't know if there will be a vote of No Confidence and if Johnson will lose it. We don't know if there will be a General Election before the 31st October or after it, we don't know if Jeremy Corbyn will be ousted as leader of the party at the end of September. And so on.

Watch this space....but expect the next developments to be replaced by others as the clock ticks down to the 31st of October.

[Stavros]

There are times when I wonder if I am living in the Twilight Zone. Each day seems to bear its unique moments of Brexit madness, while the tick clocks on to the magic moment itself, 11pm on the 31st October, no ifs, no buts, no treats, no tricks...so..

We have a Prime Minister who so far has lost every vote in the Commons, and like Stalin in the 1930s has begun to purge his Parliamentary Party of MPs who dared to vote against his wishes for a bill that proposes to make it impossible for the UK to leave the EU without a deal, MPs who in some case have been in the party for over 50 years but whose entire careers are now defined by - not even leaving the EU -but leaving as the Leader defines it. Pilloried by Brexit Revolutionaries in the press as 'Conservatives in name only', Johnson has lost 21 MPs and more to follow at a time when he needs all the votes he can get, he has alienated many people in his own party, and has watched his majority of 1 vanish into the ether, and as if that was not enough, does not even have the power to decide when the next General Election will be.

But here is where the language defies reason:
Johnson demands support for negotiating a revision to a deal which he has said is dead, which involves little or no change to the existing -dead- agreement because the negotiating team in Brussels has not put it on the table for consideration by the skeleton crew which has replaced the EU negotiating team that was disbanded in July. Johnson lied to the Commons when he said negotiations were taking place as the team did not arrive until hours later with nothing to offer, even as Johnson plots the exit without a deal in October.

Jeremy Corbyn, who voted against the deal the EU offered the UK, not once, but three times, now supports a Bill that makes it impossible for the UK to leave without a deal, but has not specified what it is Labour would expect to be in a deal agreed with the EU, which they say is the deal that was agreed with Theresa May that Corbyn rejected, while his deputy John McDonnell insists that Labour policy is to have a second referendum. So Corbyn wants a deal but won't say what it is, while proposing to reject the deal that does exist, and impose another Referendum on the people as if the first one had not caused enough damage, and, note, with no futher advice other than that Remain will be on the ballot paper.

At a time when the Tories are busy destroying their party, Labour, instead of presenting the country with the image of a strong opposition with a vibrant alternative to existing government policy is still incoherent, and led by a man with the charisma of a cheese sandwich, and a catastrophic inability to tell the truth abut his own views of the EU.

It is all bullshit. With or without a deal, the UK must negotiate a new relationship with the EU after it leaves and it may take yers to conclude it. On the basis of what we have seen so far, any hope of a positive outcome is unlikely. We shall be in the Twilight Zone for some time to come, and it doesn't even matter who is in government, as they have to manage Brexit, the clutch of controversial policies that may be impossible to manage.

[Jericho]

We have a Prime Minister who so far has lost every vote in the Commons, and like Stalin in the 1930s has begun to purge his Parliamentary Party of MPs who dared to vote against his wishes for a bill that proposes to make it impossible for the UK to leave the EU without a deal, MPs who in some case have been in the party for over 50 years but whose entire careers are now defined by - not even leaving the EU -but leaving as the Leader defines it. Pilloried by Brexit Revolutionaries in the press as 'Conservatives in name only', Johnson has lost 21 MPs and more to follow at a time when he needs all the votes he can get, he has alienated many people in his own party, and has watched his majority of 1 vanish into the ether, and as if that was not enough, does not even have the power to decide when the next General Election will be.

And then along comes Jo.
Comes to something when your own brother goes O.T.S. (would that count as incest)?

[Stavros]

And then along comes Jo.
Comes to something when your own brother goes O.T.S. (would that count as incest)?

Maybe incensed? This is what Boris said when Ed beat Dave to become Labour Party leader-

only a 'socialist would regard familial ties as being so trivial as to shaft his brother.'

[Jericho]

Maybe incensed? This is what Boris said when Ed beat Dave to become Labour Party leader-

only a 'socialist would regard familial ties as being so trivial as to shaft his brother.'


The delicious ironies of Boris Defloppy Johnson's leadership so far have not bypassed my notice.
Nor the increasing ranks of the glibdems.

[Jericho]

I used to have a hang on this politics thing, now I haven't got clue.
Is Johnson going to bring back a deal, is he going to break the law, are the courts going to reopen parliament? What the fuck is going on!

[Stavros]

The Incredible Hulk is going to break the chains that bind us to the EU...(don't know how to post a GiF)

https://twitter.com/IamHappyToast/status/1173344940044226561

[Stavros]

https://twitter.com/IamHappyToast/status/1173344940044226561

[Jericho]

He's just gone from incredible hulk to the invisible man!
I've discovered a new fondness for luxembergians!

[peejaye]

I used to have a hang on this politics thing, now I haven't got clue.
Is Johnson going to bring back a deal, is he going to break the law, are the courts going to reopen parliament? What the fuck is going on!

Well apparently we're leaving Jez? On Halloween? No matter what?
Hope my grammar's ok mate, you know what we great unwashed are like:ignore:

[rodinuk]

Supreme Court 11 Boris Johnson 0
Unanimous, prorogation null and void.

[filghy2]

So what happens now? I can hardly wait for the next episode in the decline and fall of the once-great empire.

In the past the PM would have at least felt the need to resign after something like this - maybe even gone off to the library with a revolver to atone for bringing HM into disrepute. Not much chance of that from Boris I guess.

One question this raises is whether the UK would be better off with a written constitution. Currently too much seems to depend on the assumption that a PM will do the right thing and follow conventions.

[Jericho]

Well apparently we're leaving Jez? On Halloween? No matter what?
Hope my grammar's ok mate, you know what we great unwashed are like:ignore:

Tell me that, 1/11.
I might believe it then...And despair.

[Stavros]

So what happens now? I can hardly wait for the next episode in the decline and fall of the once-great empire.

In the past the PM would have at least felt the need to resign after something like this - maybe even gone off to the library with a revolver to atone for bringing HM into disrepute. Not much chance of that from Boris I guess.

One question this raises is whether the UK would be better off with a written constitution. Currently too much seems to depend on the assumption that a PM will do the right thing and follow conventions.

1) Boris Johnson has said he wants the UK to leave the EU on the 31st October with a deal, or mutually agreed 'terms of withdrawal' required by the conditions of negotiation laid out in Article 50 of the Lisbon Treaty. Because the current Withdrawal Agreement has been rejected by Parliament three times, either Johnson offers an amended version to the EU, or he asks the EU to extend the Article 50 process again. He must do this in time for the EU to consider the new proposals at the Summit Meeting arranged for 17th October, but by 19th October at the latest, and not only must all of the 27 Member State agree to it, so must the EU Parliament, and the Parliament of the UK. Crucially, the terms of the EU Withdrawal (No 2) Act 2019, state that if the Prime Minister fails to produce a new offer to the EU, he must write a letter seeking an extension to avoid leaving without a deal. He has said in the Commons he will not do this, in effect, stating his intention to defy the law.
If Johnson fails to provide a new offer that meets the conditions above, the EU can reject the appeal for an extension, so that in effect, the EU will have expelled the UK from the EU, which it can also do if the UK Government refuses to appoint a new Commissioner to take up his or her position on 1st November.
But, if Johnson fails to abide by UK law by writing to the EU seeking an extension, he may be arrested and charged with contempt:
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/boris-jonson-brexit-supreme-court-jail-break-law-extension-deal-a9120501.html

2) Boris Johnson has not resigned because he has no dignity, no morals, no values and no respect for the Rule of Law or the procedures of the Houses of Parliament. He has screwed up but won't 'carry the can' and neither will the Attorney General Geoffrey Cox, who declared in the Commons 'we got it wrong' but carried on anyway, and said he respected the Supreme Court decision, then proceeded to trash it. We don't even know what his legal advice was to Johnson and if Johnson ignored it, or what it was that led Johnson to make a mess of the business of government. Johnson has lost every vote in the Commons, he has demolished any hope of a majority in Parliament by expelling more than 20 of his own MPs, and has been humiliated by the Supreme Court. He now thinks he is the second coming of the worst and most corrupt traitor to call himself President of the USA, and decided attack is the best form of defence.
His days are numbered.

3) A written constitution would be heaven on earth for lawyers. Just to write one and then get agreement with it could take ten years. We have better things to do with our time, but if Brexit is a Revolution, who knows what might happen?

[filghy2]

Well you did have your Glorious Revolution in 1688 when the monarch refused to accept the primacy of parliament, so maybe it's time for another one. Isn't BJ acting just like James II or Charles I? If the executive refuses to accept that it's actions should be constrained by either parliament or the courts is that any different to the divine right of kings?

In any case, it looks like you are heading for an almighty constitutional crisis, with highly uncertain consequences. I am not so sure that BJ's days are numbered. I understand the Tories are ahead of Labour in the polls, BJ is clearly going to run on a populist "people vs elites" platform and he'll get a lot of help from the Murdoch press. I'm not sure that Labour's fence-sitting position is helping it either - they might be making a fatal miscalculation that the Remainers have nowhere else to go. I know Corbyn did better than expected last time, but that was against a very poor campaigner.

Brexit really has become a fetish for its supporters - something that has to be achieved regardless of the consequences. They seem to have entered an Orwellian world in which parliamentary democracy and the rule of law must be sacrificed in the name of the peoples' will - even though the form of Brexit was not specified in the referendum and few Leave voters are likely to have thought they were voting for a no-deal Brexit at the time. For instance, our resident Brexit fan has never been able to explain what the alternative is to EU membership or how it's going to make the country better off - his umpteen posts on the subject all amount to "We won. We're leaving. Up yours."

[Stavros]

I am not so sure that BJ's days are numbered. I understand the Tories are ahead of Labour in the polls, BJ is clearly going to run on a populist "people vs elites" platform and he'll get a lot of help from the Murdoch press. I'm not sure that Labour's fence-sitting position is helping it either - they might be making a fatal miscalculation that the Remainers have nowhere else to go. I know Corbyn did better than expected last time, but that was against a very poor campaigner.


It is possible Boris Johnson could do better than expected, but there are two factors that could see him out of office:
1) A lot depends on what happens between now and the 31st October, crucially with regard to 'the deal'. Johnson has said he wants a deal, but appears to have made no real effort to offer the EU something substantially different from what exists in the Terms of Withdrawal rejected by Parliament, suggesting it is a smokescreen to enable him to leave the EU without a deal, in effect, rendering the Article 50 process void. But, were he to agree something at the last minute, he runs the risk that his own Parliament will reject it, for whatever reason and thus get the UK out of the EU but discover WTO rules are not as congenial as he thinks, and that if not 'chaos', enough problems emerge to discourage the voters from supporting him.
Any deal he signs which leaves the UK half in half out of the EU (eg, Northern Ireland) will be opposed by the Brexit Party which has said it will campaign against him and MPs in 'leave' constituencies.
2) If the Brexit Party runs against Johnson in his constituency, Uxbridge and South Ruislip, and if Labour and the Liberal Democrats can reach an agreement for one of them to stand down, in a three way fight Johnson, whose majority was cut in half in the 2017 election, could become the first Prime Minister since Arthur Balfour in 1906 to lose his seat at a General Election. It is doable, even without the Brexit Party, but it does need an agreement between Labour and the Liberal Democrats.

[Jericho]

2) If the Brexit Party runs against Johnson in his constituency, Uxbridge and South Ruislip, and if Labour and the Liberal Democrats can reach an agreement for one of them to stand down, in a three way fight Johnson, whose majority was cut in half in the 2017 election, could become the first Prime Minister since Arthur Balfour in 1906 to lose his seat at a General Election. It is doable, even without the Brexit Party, but it does need an agreement between Labour and the Liberal Democrats.

I can't see any Labour alliance happening whilst Swinson is head of the libdems.

[Stavros]

I can't see any Labour alliance happening whilst Swinson is head of the libdems.

On an alliance, you are right. But an arrangement for a single constituency? It can be done.

[Jericho]

On an alliance, you are right. But an arrangement for a single constituency? It can be done.

Any single constituency but that one.
Considering how small Johnson's majority is (and previous momentum activity), could you imagine the msn shitstorm if Labour didn't field a candidate there?

The way I read it, the only way that that could ever happen would be as part of deal to back Corbyn in a Unity Government. And the way it's looking, the only way Swinson would go for that, is if her own mps threaten to rebel against her (new influx aside, not against the realms of possibility).

[Stavros]

Does anyone remember Brexit? I feel almost embarrassed to read my posts above, but whatever the process has been frozen because the negotiations which were supposed to begin in March have obviousy not happened. It remains to be seen if as a result the EU and the UK can negotiate even an interim trade deal by December 2020.

In the meantime, if anyone wants to read the full Report by the Labour Party into anti-semitism and how it did not handle it, complete with uncensored insults by party officials directed at the leadership, the full report of over 800 pages is here-

https://www.docdroid.net/vUujX67/200329-labour-report-finalpdf-pdf

[Jericho]

A bit more than insults.
And not just by party 'officials'.

[Stavros]

The negotiations on the trade deal due to be signed in December are at an impasse. No doubt Covid 19 has been a road block, but so too have the positions taken by both sides, in which it appears, the UK in the negotiations wants all the benefits of membership with none of the responsibilities, thus Michel Barnier has stated:

“Every time we meet they say they would be happy to have a Canada-style agreement, but at the same time ... they ask for far more from us than is available under the Canadian model,” Barnier said, citing the UK’s desire for “virtually full freedom of movement” for short visits, maintenance of “existing arrangements” on electricity interconnection, as well as “broad and widespread” recognition of professional qualifications to enable British lawyers, accountants and auditors to work in the EU.
“We are not going to bargain away our European values to the benefit of the British economy,” Barnier said. “Economic and trading fair play is not for sale. It is not ‘a nice to have’, it is ‘a must have’.”
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2020/may/15/negotiators-gloomy-as-eu-uk-brexit-talks-end-in-stalemate

If these negotiations cannot move on, is the UK heading towards a No Deal exit? The militants, who still claim the UK can, indeed must leave the EU without any of the 'Canada' style arrangements, are now looking at Boris Johnson, worried perhaps that he may seek an extension to the negotiations, arguing that Covid 19 was an unexpected intrusion and that not even a 'bare bones' agreement can be reached over the summer in time for a December signature.

It looks to me like Boris Johnson has lost his sparkle. I don't know if it is the baby keeping him awake at early hours, or the physical toll of his encounter with Covid 19 -which was also an encouner with Death-but I wonder, is Boris about to rock his party with an amendment to the law, or is he going to take the UK out of the EU without a trade deal when Global Trade is in recession?

It was supposed to be our Brave New World. Lord of the Flies might be a better model.

[Stavros]

Andrew Rawnsley has written an interesting article on the troubled negotiations between the UK and the EU on the trade agreement that is supposed to be signed in December, to mark the formal end of the transition period, and the beginning of the UK's 'independence'- he notes the fact that because the UK has remained in the Single Market and the Customs Union, it has meant that supplies of food and other goods have continued to flow into the UK, as traders and hauliers are exempt from isolation guidelines, just as they are exempt from the 14-day quarantine regulations about to be imposed on arrivals from outsde the UK.

Johnson is also now considering bringing forward the relaxation on the ban on pubs and restaurants opening, terrified that if the hospitality industry is not 'released from lockdown' now, 3.5 million are set to lose their jobs- though I don't think the breaking of physical distancing guidelines by Black Lives Matter demonstrators has been a factor.

The question is, if the UK leaves without a deal, will this not plunge the UK into a worse recessions than the one we are moving into? Johnson seems so committed to 'gettiing Brexit done' it may not be possible for him to compromise any more, but we shall see.

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2020/jun/07/the-coronavirus-crisis-wont-give-boris-johnson-an-alibi-for-a-calamitous-brexit

see also
https://in.reuters.com/article/health-coronavirus-britain-idINKBN23E029

[Stavros]

It is not looking good unless Boris is going to pull some rabbits out of the hat at the last minute -either he undermines his postion by accepting compromises, or he goes for broke.

"Every stage of the UK’s uncoupling from the EU has been mapped out by treaty, including the expiry of transitional arrangements at the end of this year. By then, a free trade deal is supposed to have been negotiated and ratified. That is getting harder with each passing week. The impediment is British reluctance to recognise what is realistically available, or understand the imbalances of power in negotiations between a lone country and a continental trading bloc. In June, the prime minister said he could see no reason (https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2020/jun/15/boris-johnson-hopes-securing-brexit-trade-deal-given-boost-eu) why broad agreement might not be reached in July. But there was a reason, and he was it. Mr Johnson has not paid close attention, made choices or given his negotiators bandwidth for compromise.
The UK still demands pristine sovereignty, with no obligation to align its standards with EU markets, plus a right to subsidise domestic industries to a degree not permitted under Brussels rules. The EU will not grant privileged market access on those terms, because doing so would undermine its own industries. Eurosceptic hardliners say they would prefer no deal to any obligation to match continental standards.
Whether that is a bluff or not is a question that interests EU leaders less and less. They have other things to do. At the instigation of Germany (https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2020/aug/26/germany-scraps-plans-for-brexit-talks-at-eu-ambassadors-summit), Brexit has been dropped from the agenda of a top-level European meeting next week on the grounds that there is nothing new to discuss. Mr Johnson knows what the options are – they range from close integration to something more distant, with tariffs and quotas – and he must choose.
But he doesn’t. Instead, the government still treats Brexit in the most superficial manner, as if the performance of readiness counts as the real thing. A report that Tony Abbott, a former Australian prime minister, might take on a senior trade advisory role (https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2020/aug/26/former-australian-pm-tony-abbott-tipped-for-post-brexit-uk-trade-advisory-role) is a case in point. Setting aside Mr Abbott’s notoriously rebarbative character (https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2020/aug/26/choosing-tony-abbott-uk-trade-envoy-staggering-says-labour), the appointment would be consistent with the myth, common among Brexit supporters, that trade deals are conjured into being by swaggering personalities.
The reality is that good outcomes in a trade deal are achieved by the application of time, attention to detail, experienced negotiators and a rational appraisal of the other side’s interests. The UK government is deficient on all those metrics."
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2020/aug/26/the-guardian-view-on-brexit-deadlines-boris-johnsons-nemesis

[Jericho]

Nice to see we're taking charge of our own borders...And turning the 'Garden of England' into a truck-stop!

[Stavros]

Nice to see we're taking charge of our own borders...And turning the 'Garden of England' into a truck-stop!


Kent today, Wales tomorrrow. "Show me your papers..." (and they won't mean Rizla).

[Jericho]

Kent today, Wales tomorrow. "Show me your papers..." (and they won't mean Rizla).

Rizla?
We'll have none of that French froggery in patriotic brexit Britain, thank you kindly!

Right, I'm off to shag a flag and complain about a necklace!

[Stavros]

As deadlines for a conclusion to the trade deal with the EU come and go, but can't go on for much longer, the drama that has convulsed Dowing St for the past few days shoud really be seen in the context of Brexit, given that the chidish rages and accusations of the Prime Minister, his immiment wife, the special advisers and the new Press team are just what is expected from an incompetent manager and the aggressive take-no-prisoner Leave heroes who have been or had been Johnson's Myrmidons.

The fear among the Leave fanatics in the House of Commons is that the PM who has not been around much to talk to them, is now surrounded by women, and women who are lukewarm on his precious Brexit project. Given that some compromises will be required if the UK is to end the transition out of the EU on January 1st with a deal, the anxiety among the fanatics is that he will give away so much the UK will still retain too many links to the EU to valdate their understanding of what Brexit is.

On cue this week, and perhaps in a personal lament for his departing idol in DC, Nigel Farage has formed a new party, The Reform Party that he hopes will challenge Johnsn and his Government on Brexit, and maybe stand against Conservative councillors in the local elections next May. Sme of us had hoped this perennial loser would emigrate to the US to get closer to his Billionaire buddy, but that career doesn't seem to be going anywhere, unless the'King of Europe' can get a talkshow on TrumpTV, if it happens.

But it is a fascinating example of how politics can go wrong so quickly -just less than a year ago, Johnson was the Tory hero with an 80-seat majority. Since then, he has lost a lot of the goodwill he had in December 2019, in part because of his atrocious hadling of Covid-19, and in part because the very man who led the Brexit campaign in 2016 is now seen to be a liability in delivering it, unless he decides to go for broke and not sign a trade deal at all.

One of the ironies of the anxiety expressed by some Leave MPs, is that his wife-to-be, Carrie Symonds, who some claim texted him on WhatsApp 25 times an hour when he was in the Commons a few weeks ago and being humiliated by Ed Miliband, and is ridiculed in other places as 'Princess Nuts Nuts', was the head of communications for the Conservative Party -when Theresa May was Prime Mnister, the woman Johnson spent a year stabbing in the back to get her job. Last week when May stood up to reply to Johnson's address on the new lockdown measures, he not only left the chamber before she had finished her first sentence, he demonstrated his contempt for a former Prime Minister, by walking the length of the Commons floor, rather than making a quick one by the Speaker's chair. I wonder what Carrie made of that?

In other words, there is a problem, a whole host of problems, summed up in two words: Boris Johnson.

If you are interested, you can read about the Battle of Downing St here-
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2020/nov/14/nightmare-on-downing-street

[sukumvit boy]

OK ,I know I'm about to demonstrate my hopeless American ignorance of British politics but I was watching the news the other night on PBS and with a "hard exit" looming just weeks away and with the forecasts of the expected economic downturn resulting from a hard exit on top of the economic devastation already resulting from Covid-19 why don't you just call the whole thing off? They showed the results of a recent poll that indicated that 57% of Brits wanted to remain in the EU .
Can't someone just give me a short answer.
"You're a stupid arse", doesn't count.

[Stavros]

OK ,I know I'm about to demonstrate my hopeless American ignorance of British politics but I was watching the news the other night on PBS and with a "hard exit" looming just weeks away and with the forecasts of the expected economic downturn resulting from a hard exit on top of the economic devastation already resulting from Covid-19 why don't you just call the whole thing off? They showed the results of a recent poll that indicated that 57% of Brits wanted to remain in the EU .
Can't someone just give me a short answer.
"You're a stupid arse", doesn't count.

Article 50 of the Lisbon Tteaty allows any member of the EU to cancel its membership. But it involves a two stage process: an agreement on the terms of withdrawal, and on that basis a trade agreement to organise the independent state’s new relationship with the EU. What the UK was promised would be an easy deal has turned into a sequence of tortuous negotiations on the withdrawal agreement, finalised in January, and now the trade agreement.

A ‘hard Brexit’ is an exit from the EU without a trade agreement, or ‘no deal’, and means the UK having to trade on WTO terms alone, and mostly on hard goods as the WTO has failed to produce a consensus on services. To the Brexit fanatics, a hard exit was always their preferred option, calling it a ‘clean break’, and have accused Johnson of turning compromise into surrender even though right now there are still unresolved issues which mean the UK could leave without a deal. But if there is a deal it must involve compromises on Northern Ireland, fishing rights, and the level of State Aid the two stages engage in. Because international agreements almost always require a compromise. In theory a final decision must be made this week, in practice the EU might extend the talks.

Johnson is going to Brussels for a face to face meeting with Ursula von der Layen tomorrow (Wednesday) but it is hard to know what will come of it, though one sarcastic wag in the Telegraph said Johnson will return with two documents- a surrender, and a marriage certificate....

[Stavros]

Apologies for spelling mistake I have only just noticed-
Ursula von der Leyen.

[Stavros]

Both UK and EU officials are warning us that there might not be any agreement on trade, and that if this is so, the UK will leave without a deal on December 31st.

Someone who claims inside knowledge of the dinner Johnson had with Ursula von der Leyen las Wednesday, has claimed Johnson attempted to win over Ms Leyen by attacking Michel Barnier and the French, which Ms Leyen did not find amusing, and when she asked him if he had brought any new proposals on trade he said no. Most of the dinner after that seems to have been held in a mixture of silence and unremarkable conversation, the source claiming Johnson did not seem to realize how offensive he had been.

The account is in this twitter feed-
https://twitter.com/PaulBurston/status/1337313829978509312

Broris Johnson said today leaving the EU without a deal would be a wonderful thing, yet in 2016 he wrote, in an article for the Telegraph- (the original is hidden behind a paywall)

"Boris Johnson (https://www.independent.co.uk/topic/BorisJohnson) has said the UK there will be “still have access to the single market”, despite Britain’s historic vote to leave the EU (https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brexit-live-latest-news-eu-referendum-labour-shadow-cabinet-jeremy-corbyn-hilary-benn-heidi-a7103926.html).
In his column for The Telegraph (http://go.redirectingat.com/?id=44681X1458326&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.telegraph.co.uk%2Fnews%2F2016 %2F06%2F26%2Fi-cannot-stress-too-much-that-britain-is-part-of-europe--and-alw%2F&sref=https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/boris-johnson-eu-referendum-single-market-brexit-a7104846.html), Mr Johnson said: “I cannot stress too much that Britain is part of Europe, and always will be.
“EU citizens living in this country will have their rights fully protected, and the same goes for British citizens living in the EU.
“British people will still be able to go and work in the EU; to live; to travel; to study; to buy homes and to settle down. As the German equivalent of the CBI – the BDI – has very sensibly reminded us, there will continue to be free trade, and access to the single market.
“Britain is and always will be a great European power, offering top-table opinions and giving leadership on everything from foreign policy to defence to counter-terrorism and intelligence-sharing – all the things we need to do together to make our world safer.”
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/boris-johnson-eu-referendum-single-market-brexit-a7104846.html



Boris Johnson -a liar, an idiot, or both? I am not sure if he even cares what happens in January.

[holzz]

A no-deal may have bad effectgs in the short-term, but it's worth it.
Time to end this brexit mess and once and for all we're done.
Maybe we'll rejoin in a few decades - maybe in 2040 a very old Putin will invade the EU and we'll need each for help and out of gratitude they'll let us back in.

[Stavros]

A no-deal may have bad effectgs in the short-term, but it's worth it.

Perhaps you could tell is how a no deal will be worth it in the long term, having also told us how long the 'short-term' will be. Five years? Ten Years? I suggest you address your remarks with regard to - farming, fishing, passporting in the banking and financial sector, fair trade, and UK-Eu co-operation in policing, security and intelligence. It will make for interestig reading.

[Nikka]

Euro girls will have to move away from the UK? (serious question)

[Stavros]

Citizens of EU countries, or EEA countries, or Switzerland need to apply to the EU Settlement Scheme, this can be done online.

From the UK Government website-

Apply to the EU Settlement Scheme by 30 June 2021 to continue living in the UK - you must have arrived in the UK before January 2021
If you do not apply to the scheme, you may not be able to continue living or working in the UK as you do now.

You do not need to apply if you have: indefinite leave to enter the UK, indefinite leave to remain in the UK, British or Irish citizenship (including ‘dual citizenship’).
Read the guidance:
Apply to the EU Settlement Scheme (settled and pre-settled status) (https://www.gov.uk/settled-status-eu-citizens-families)

https://www.gov.uk/transition-check/results?c%5B%5D=does-not-own-operate-business-organisation&c%5B%5D=visiting-row&c%5B%5D=travel-eu-business-no&c%5B%5D=working-uk&c%5B%5D=living-uk&c%5B%5D=nationality-eu

If you’re an EU, EEA or Swiss citizen, you and your family can apply to the EU Settlement Scheme to continue living in the UK after 30 June 2021. You can also apply if you’re the family member of an eligible person of Northern Ireland (https://www.gov.uk/settled-status-eu-citizens-families/family-member-eligible-person-from-northern-ireland).
If your application is successful, you’ll get either settled or pre-settled status (https://www.gov.uk/settled-status-eu-citizens-families/what-settled-and-presettled-status-means).
The EEA includes the EU countries and also Iceland, Liechtenstein and Norway.

You may be able to stay in the UK without applying (https://www.gov.uk/settled-status-eu-citizens-families/eligibility) - for example, if you’re an Irish citizen or already have indefinite leave to remain.
https://www.gov.uk/settled-status-eu-citizens-families

[Nikka]

Thanks, looks Easy

[holzz]

Perhaps you could tell is how a no deal will be worth it in the long term, having also told us how long the 'short-term' will be. Five years? Ten Years? I suggest you address your remarks with regard to - farming, fishing, passporting in the banking and financial sector, fair trade, and UK-Eu co-operation in policing, security and intelligence. It will make for interestig reading.

we've spent years in this limbo.
Who says a no deal would be bad in the long-term? Who even says the short-term effects would be as bad as made out?
I want it to stop, period.

[filghy2]

we've spent years in this limbo.
Who says a no deal would be bad in the long-term? Who even says the short-term effects would be as bad as made out?
I want it to stop, period.

"The long run is a misleading guide to current affairs. In the long run we are all dead. Economists set themselves too easy, too useless a task if in tempestuous seasons they can only tell us that when the storm is past the ocean will be flat again."

John Maynard Keynes

[filghy2]

I want it to stop, period.

Why do you think it will stop? Brexit is not a destination - it can only be the start of a journey toward some other destination. The Brexit delusion is like a person unhappy with their life who imagines all of their problems will be solved if they just quit their job and leave their house and family.

[holzz]

Why do you think it will stop? Brexit is not a destination - it can only be the start of a journey toward some other destination. The Brexit delusion is like a person unhappy with their life who imagines all of their problems will be solved if they just quit their job and leave their house and family.

I want the process of leaving to stop. four years is too long. then we can move on as a country. Brexit is a destination. So once we leave the EU, then we can go on to the next chapter.

[holzz]

also, i'm just stating my opinion. don't get fucking terse, as i say what I fucking wish. get over that reality.

[Stavros]

we've spent years in this limbo.
Who says a no deal would be bad in the long-term? Who even says the short-term effects would be as bad as made out?
I want it to stop, period.


I am disappointed with your post. Far from being in 'Limbo' since the Referendum in 2016, the UK and the EU have been engaged in an intense negotiation process. It was always going to be a process in two phases, because that it is the legal basis of Article 50: phase one, negotiate terms of withdrawal, phase two, negotiate a long-term terms of trade agreement.

If you recall the lies that were told by Leave campaigners in 2016, leaving the EU would be easy, because on leaving the UK the four fundamental freedoms of the Single Market -the free movement of people, capital, goods and services- would be modified but not substantially changed. Only during the first phase of negotiations it became clear that such freedoms would indeed be changed precisely because the UK had left -the EU was not going to allow the UK all the advantages of full EU membership without the costs and legal responsibilities, while for its part, Theresa May was fighting a losing battle with her own Party on what should be conceded and what should not.

Two things stand out -first, the fact that because the 2016 Referendum was just a stunt its promoters never expected to win, they had no idea what Brexit meant, either the Article 50 process, or its consequences, which thus meant complete and stunning ignorance of the postion Northern Ireland was in with regard to the Customs Union. Second, there was a blithe indifference to facts shaped by English arrogance -for example, the Germans will want a quick deal to protect the hundreds of thousands of cars they sell to the UK every year. When I put this argument to a German friend, he all but collapsed in a heap of laughter pointing out Germany sold more than 20 million vehicles to China in one year. He then added, 'You voted to leave, so fuck off!'

We have now reached a point where the current trade agreement the EU is offering the UK retains tariff free access to the Single Market, while Boris Johnson says No Deal will be 'Wonderful', indifferent to the huge tariffs that must be imposed on the UK by the WTO in such circumstances. In both the short term, and the long term, the UK will be worse off because it will have detached itself from the largest single market in the world which is also its nearest neighbour. It is rare for Governments to make decisions of such scope on the same basis as flipping a coin in the hope that when it lands, it will be either heads or tails. But then it is, or used to be rare for our Liberal Democracies to elect as its leaders men and women with no substantial expertise in policy making, but a heavy commitment to an image of themselves on TV, as if that was all that matters, and no respect whatsoever for the people without whom there would be no democracy at all. But as is now being suggested with regard to the supporters of Trump and the man himself, do they want to live in an open democracy?

[holzz]

I am disappointed with your post. Far from being in 'Limbo' since the Referendum in 2016, the UK and the EU have been engaged in an intense negotiation process. It was always going to be a process in two phases, because that it is the legal basis of Article 50: phase one, negotiate terms of withdrawal, phase two, negotiate a long-term terms of trade agreement.

If you recall the lies that were told by Leave campaigners in 2016, leaving the EU would be easy, because on leaving the UK the four fundamental freedoms of the Single Market -the free movement of people, capital, goods and services- would be modified but not substantially changed. Only during the first phase of negotiations it became clear that such freedoms would indeed be changed precisely because the UK had left -the EU was not going to allow the UK all the advantages of full EU membership without the costs and legal responsibilities, while for its part, Theresa May was fighting a losing battle with her own Party on what should be conceded and what should not.

Two things stand out -first, the fact that because the 2016 Referendum was just a stunt its promoters never expected to win, they had no idea what Brexit meant, either the Article 50 process, or its consequences, which thus meant complete and stunning ignorance of the postion Northern Ireland was in with regard to the Customs Union. Second, there was a blithe indifference to facts shaped by English arrogance -for example, the Germans will want a quick deal to protect the hundreds of thousands of cars they sell to the UK every year. When I put this argument to a German friend, he all but collapsed in a heap of laughter pointing out Germany sold more than 20 million vehicles to China in one year. He then added, 'You voted to leave, so fuck off!'

We have now reached a point where the current trade agreement the EU is offering the UK retains tariff free access to the Single Market, while Boris Johnson says No Deal will be 'Wonderful', indifferent to the huge tariffs that must be imposed on the UK by the WTO in such circumstances. In both the short term, and the long term, the UK will be worse off because it will have detached itself from the largest single market in the world which is also its nearest neighbour. It is rare for Governments to make decisions of such scope on the same basis as flipping a coin in the hope that when it lands, it will be either heads or tails. But then it is, or used to be rare for our Liberal Democracies to elect as its leaders men and women with no substantial expertise in policy making, but a heavy commitment to an image of themselves on TV, as if that was all that matters, and no respect whatsoever for the people without whom there would be no democracy at all. But as is now being suggested with regard to the supporters of Trump and the man himself, do they want to live in an open democracy?

Disappointed that I don't share your exact view? pardon me for being an individual!!

May fucked the process up, and BoJo came in and corrected it.

BoJo's exit deal wasn't that different to May's. But he managed to pass it, and we're now - hopefully - reaching the end of this mess. May also called an election but lost seats and had to get the DUP to bolster her up. BoJo didn't. With more decisive leadership, then Brexit would have been done a lot easier. BoJo's only mishap in office is the pandemic and not mismanaging getting out of the EU.
Economics isn't an exact science. For all we know there could be some war which fucks up all of Europe's economies in a few decades, who knows?
Sometimes in life, there aren't always perfect solutions. Brexit happened, so we have to deal with it. We voted out, and we spent a few years fucking up the exiting process, but now we're in sight of the end-goal. We just have to handle this less than desired solution. That's life, imho.

[Stavros]

Disappointed that I don't share your exact view? pardon me for being an individual!!

May fucked the process up, and BoJo came in and corrected it.

BoJo's exit deal wasn't that different to May's. But he managed to pass it, and we're now - hopefully - reaching the end of this mess. May also called an election but lost seats and had to get the DUP to bolster her up. BoJo didn't. With more decisive leadership, then Brexit would have been done a lot easier. BoJo's only mishap in office is the pandemic and not mismanaging getting out of the EU.
Economics isn't an exact science. For all we know there could be some war which fucks up all of Europe's economies in a few decades, who knows?
Sometimes in life, there aren't always perfect solutions. Brexit happened, so we have to deal with it. We voted out, and we spent a few years fucking up the exiting process, but now we're in sight of the end-goal. We just have to handle this less than desired solution. That's life, imho.


You made an error of fact, it is not a matter of opinion -there was no 'limbo' -the UK and EU have been negotiating for 4 years

We are not reaching the end of 'this mess' -Brexit does not begin until January 2021. You might be right with regard to the future -the UK will adapt to changing circumstances, and just as it took years for membership of the EEC/EU to influence the way we live, so it may be years before we know what the full impact of leaving will be. That said, if we leave without a trade deal, then tariffs will be imposed under WTO rules, and the potential for conflict in UK waters with regard to fishing will increase in intensity, I think you understand that. Just as I think you understand how disruptive uncertainty is for businesses that sign contracts and plan for the next 5-10 years. The difference is, I think, that I see few positive outcomes from Brexit, but you do. In fact, I can't see any positive outcomes, but time will tell, and I am not sure I have that time left in which to find out.

[holzz]

You made an error of fact, it is not a matter of opinion -there was no 'limbo' -the UK and EU have been negotiating for 4 years

We are not reaching the end of 'this mess' -Brexit does not begin until January 2021. You might be right with regard to the future -the UK will adapt to changing circumstances, and just as it took years for membership of the EEC/EU to influence the way we live, so it may be years before we know what the full impact of leaving will be. That said, if we leave without a trade deal, then tariffs will be imposed under WTO rules, and the potential for conflict in UK waters with regard to fishing will increase in intensity, I think you understand that. Just as I think you understand how disruptive uncertainty is for businesses that sign contracts and plan for the next 5-10 years. The difference is, I think, that I see few positive outcomes from Brexit, but you do. In fact, I can't see any positive outcomes, but time will tell, and I am not sure I have that time left in which to find out.

There was limbo. May made a terrible mess of it, which BoJo sorted. It was common knowledge that May and BoJo's deals were not really that different.
Look, people can say what the fuck they want here. don't police opinions, we're humans YO.

[Stavros]

Tom Kibasi in The Guardian this morning summarizes the current situation well-

"The eventual UK-EU deal will be perhaps the first trade agreement in history to envisage more friction rather than less, less economic cooperation and regulatory alignment rather than more. Both sides will be worse off because of it, though the UK is three times as exposed and will be the biggest loser. It suits Johnson to define success as having any deal rather than no deal – a threat that was a political hoax all along. And it suits the Labour party, which has come to believe that voting for Johnson’s deal (https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2020/dec/04/neil-kinnock-backing-brexit-deal-politically-lethal-for-labour) is in its electoral interest. Titillated by the drama, British political commentators have played their part too, focusing on the fact of a deal rather than the quality of it. As has always been the case with Brexit, there was never a betrayal of Britain in Brussels; that only happens at Westminster."
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2020/dec/13/brexit-deadline-drama-uk-bad-deal-trade-agreement-friction

[Stavros]

There was limbo. May made a terrible mess of it, which BoJo sorted. It was common knowledge that May and BoJo's deals were not really that different.
Look, people can say what the fuck they want here. don't police opinions, we're humans YO.


Limbo is a condition of stasis, there has been no stasis in this process. It has been grinding on, and on, because the reality of the negotiations smacked the Conservatives in the face, and they have been stunned. At the very least recongize you have used the wrong language to describe the process, I am happy to debate your opinions freely and not 'police' them.

[holzz]

Limbo is a condition of stasis, there has been no stasis in this process. It has been grinding on, and on, because the reality of the negotiations smacked the Conservatives in the face, and they have been stunned. At the very least recongize you have used the wrong language to describe the process, I am happy to debate your opinions freely and not 'police' them.

no. you reckon this entire site is your personal playground. it's not. people can say what they want here, even if it doesn't meet your spec. wow, the arrogance!

[Stavros]

no. you reckon this entire site is your personal playground. it's not. people can say what they want here, even if it doesn't meet your spec. wow, the arrogance!

We are all equal on this site, it is up to each member to contribute as much as they wish within the rules, and you are a sterling contributor of images, which I am sure most members appreciate as I do. I am confident about some topics, that is not arrogance, but I must point out you make points, often vague, but don't really debate the issues.

In 2021 Northern Ireland becomes our only land border with the EU, it was there for all to see in 2016 but I don't recall signficant debate on it. Is Northern Ireland to remain in the Customs Union? If it is, then is the UK not in some way bound into the CU and thus the rules set by the EU and judged by the European Court of Justice? Or is the UK Government going to violate the Good Friday Agreement?

Fishing is a minor part of the UK's economy but seems to pack a punch for those whose ignorance enables them to ignore the precedents for sharing that go back centuries. I could go on, but I am not sure you want to go into the details, and yet that is where the devil lurks, waiting to spoil even the best efforts we make to survive in the coming years. It took the Czech Republic and Slovakia ten years to complete the process of separation, I expect the UK and the EU to be negotiating the fine details for a similar length of time, and would therefore not be surprised if you expressed your exasperation with it all.

[holzz]

We are all equal on this site, it is up to each member to contribute as much as they wish within the rules, and you are a sterling contributor of images, which I am sure most members appreciate as I do. I am confident about some topics, that is not arrogance, but I must point out you make points, often vague, but don't really debate the issues.

In 2021 Northern Ireland becomes our only land border with the EU, it was there for all to see in 2016 but I don't recall signficant debate on it. Is Northern Ireland to remain in the Customs Union? If it is, then is the UK not in some way bound into the CU and thus the rules set by the EU and judged by the European Court of Justice? Or is the UK Government going to violate the Good Friday Agreement?

Fishing is a minor part of the UK's economy but seems to pack a punch for those whose ignorance enables them to ignore the precedents for sharing that go back centuries. I could go on, but I am not sure you want to go into the details, and yet that is where the devil lurks, waiting to spoil even the best efforts we make to survive in the coming years. It took the Czech Republic and Slovakia ten years to complete the process of separation, I expect the UK and the EU to be negotiating the fine details for a similar length of time, and would therefore not be surprised if you expressed your exasperation with it all.

pretty false.
you have a plot here who posts what, or who contributes what. the mods never set that out. it's funny to see. expectign the world to conform to your inner dialogue lol.

[Stavros]

pretty false.
you have a plot here who posts what, or who contributes what. the mods never set that out. it's funny to see. expectign the world to conform to your inner dialogue lol.


I don't know what you are referring to, but I do note your reluctance to debate the isses generated by Brexit.

[filghy2]

also, i'm just stating my opinion. don't get fucking terse, as i say what I fucking wish. get over that reality.

Why are you so thin-skinned? If you state an opinion other people are entitled to respond to it. But don't worry - I don't intend to waste any further time responding to your inanities. If others have any sense they will do the same. Enjoy your future discussions with yourself.

[holzz]

Why are you so thin-skinned? If you state an opinion other people are entitled to respond to it. But don't worry - I don't intend to waste any further time responding to your inanities. If others have any sense they will do the same. Enjoy your future discussions with yourself.

because you comically think you have extra-rules in this world. hahha. what a dope! that's fine, we all have to believe the rules/norms of some 50-year old who thinks the world fears him. I guess you're this lonely and sad that you wish to manipulate online strangers lol. You're not here for genuine "debate" but just to silence people.

[holzz]

I don't know what you are referring to, but I do note your reluctance to debate the isses generated by Brexit.

You do it all the time. Thinking you own this space and can dictate what's said and done here. I'm not wrong for calling this out.

[Stavros]

You do it all the time. Thinking you own this space and can dictate what's said and done here. I'm not wrong for calling this out.

I don't 'own' this space any more than you do. I do not dictate anything, because you are free to challenge what I write, and you are wrong, because debating the issues means just that, but is something you do not do. What is your view of the predicament the UK is in with regard to Northern Ireland and the Customs Union? I don't know. What sort of commercial relationship should the UK have with the EU, a privileged one because of its 47-year old relationship, or one based on the deal the EU has with Canada? I don't know. And I doubt on previous evidence that you will tell me. I really don't care what you think of me, but this is an open forum and as the section suggests, it is for people to say what think about Politics and Religion. Why not engage with the issues and drop the personal stuff?

[holzz]

I don't 'own' this space any more than you do. I do not dictate anything, because you are free to challenge what I write, and you are wrong, because debating the issues means just that, but is something you do not do. What is your view of the predicament the UK is in with regard to Northern Ireland and the Customs Union? I don't know. What sort of commercial relationship should the UK have with the EU, a privileged one because of its 47-year old relationship, or one based on the deal the EU has with Canada? I don't know. And I doubt on previous evidence that you will tell me. I really don't care what you think of me, but this is an open forum and as the section suggests, it is for people to say what think about Politics and Religion. Why not engage with the issues and drop the personal stuff?

i've seen your posts. a whole range of simple stuff. so then you insistence i cannot post isn't logical. you do reckon you own this space and it's funny.

[Stavros]

i've seen your posts. a whole range of simple stuff. so then you insistence i cannot post isn't logical. you do reckon you own this space and it's funny.


You do post, and I do not objeact to any of your posts, but there is a difference between posting a one-sentence opinion, and debating the issues of the thread. Do you have a view on Fishing, on intelligence and security, on Northern Ireland? Instead of focusing on me, debate the issues, that is what Politics & Religion is for.

[broncofan]

i've seen your posts. a whole range of simple stuff. so then you insistence i cannot post isn't logical. you do reckon you own this space and it's funny.
I don't think he polices content more than anyone else. There are times when just about everyone on this side of the forum has noted something is off topic (including my post here) or personal or looks like abuse depending on what is posted. That is only natural and I haven't seen him tell you exactly what you should say. Disagreeing with someone's view is not trying to control what someone says but offering a different view. And yes, saying they think you're wrong about something. That was all he did.

[Stavros]

I have to assume this marks the end of this thread.

The EU has produced this 'at a glance' infographic on what the Trade Deal contains - very general view. Some details not included- -financial passporting ends, Erasmus ends, fishing quotas will tax tiny minds over the 5.5 year 'transition' period; and we still don't really know what rights to work, study and live in the EU and UK will be, but for now UK citizens are limited to 90 days free stay in the EU.

Infographic here-scroll down to EU_membership_two columns (pdf)
https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/ip_20_2531

On dit qu’un prompt départ vous éloigne de nous,
Seigneur. À vos douleurs je viens joindre mes larmes

In the 250th anniversary year of his birth, let Beethoven stand for all of us in these challenging times-

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KLivIQwUV2c