Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #51  
Old 11-14-2018, 01:45 AM
UDS UDS is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Australia
Posts: 8,450
Quote:
Originally Posted by PatrickLondon View Post
Not to mention defining the question, and how the answers would be interpreted. This deal or no deal? This deal, or no deal, or call the whole thing off and hope everyone forgets it ever happened?
Yes, all this.

Plus also the question of timing. As of right now, the UK is on an inexorable course to quit the EU on 29 March 2019. That is almost certainly not enough time for the UK to take the legislative, administrative and practical steps and processes that a referendum would require, so they'd need to agree an extension of time with the EU, and this would require the unamimous consent of the 27 other member states of the EU. This consent is unlikely to be forthcoming unless allowing time for another referendum afforded a good prospect of a materially better outcome (from the EU's point of view) than not allowing time would.

Tl;dr: At this point a second referendum is only feasible if the EU-27 all agree that it would be a good idea.
  #52  
Old 11-14-2018, 02:13 AM
PastTense PastTense is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 7,117
There is plenty of time to do a referendum. If there are particular time constraints in existing legislation they can be changed. Remember:
Quote:
The 2017 United Kingdom general election took place on Thursday 8 June, having been announced just under two months earlier by Prime Minister Theresa May on 18 April 2017[2] after it was discussed at cabinet.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United...election,_2017

If you can do a general election in two months, you can do a referendum in two months.
  #53  
Old 11-14-2018, 03:22 AM
Malden Capell Malden Capell is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: London
Posts: 2,182
I just wish I'd bookmarked all the times the Leavers and Remainers-turned-Leavers on this board had said everything would turn out fine...


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
  #54  
Old 11-14-2018, 03:24 AM
Malden Capell Malden Capell is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: London
Posts: 2,182
Quote:
Originally Posted by PastTense View Post
There is plenty of time to do a referendum. If there are particular time constraints in existing legislation they can be changed. Remember:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United...election,_2017

If you can do a general election in two months, you can do a referendum in two months.


I agree. Dust off the 2016 referendum legislation, changes the dates and the questions. Perhaps make it two-stage, the second stage coming two weeks later.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
  #55  
Old 11-14-2018, 04:37 AM
UDS UDS is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Australia
Posts: 8,450
Quote:
Originally Posted by PastTense View Post
There is plenty of time to do a referendum. If there are particular time constraints in existing legislation they can be changed. Remember:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United...election,_2017

If you can do a general election in two months, you can do a referendum in two months.
Only with signficant legal changes. UK legislation on referendums, for instance, prescribes a process for settling the question to be put, including fixed periods for public consultation. There's also a process to identify and designate official campaigns for each side of the question; that takes time. None of that arises in relation to a general election.

Of course, parliament can do anything, so parliament can sweep aside all these tiresome processes and just cut to the chase, if so minded. But the processes are there for a reason. And, since one of the major concerns about the 2016 referendum is the extent to which the process was corrupted or abused through illegal foreign donations, illegal concerted practices, abuse of data, etc, etc, the notion that a second referendum would be more satisfactory with processes intended to protect the integrity of the system being weakened or removed altogether is not an appealing one.
  #56  
Old 11-14-2018, 04:54 AM
Filbert Filbert is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 5,087
It's very hard to say what the results would actually be like for another referendum; I've met a lot of people who initially weren't bothered either way who now think Brexit is heading for disaster, but there also seem to be a lot of people who are swallowing the concept that the failure to get an amazing deal is due wholly to 'bullying by Brussels' rather than unrealistic claims by Leave.

People buying that Brussels are somehow bullies for refusing allow the UK access to everything they want without paying (plus a pony that craps glitter) are loudly claiming that a no-deal Brexit would be 'telling Brussels where to go', and is therefore the preferred plan of action. I suspect some people with this attitude are just the same people who phone their utilities companies and threaten to get them arrested if their services are cut off for non-payment, but those campaigning are saying they're meeting a lot of them, and they'd be furious and out in force if another referendum was called; which way it would go, I don't know.

I suspect a 3-option referendum of 'This deal (whatever that is), no deal, or try and cancel the whole thing' would maybe produce a cancel result, but there's a genuine risk that 'No deal' would beat it out, because a lot of people aren't thinking further than 'Well, that'd show them that they can't boss us around!'

Maybe we should try the Marshmallow test before allowing someone to vote?
  #57  
Old 11-14-2018, 06:38 AM
AK84 AK84 is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 15,778
Just read someone on Twitter describe the whole Brexit deal as divorcing your husband to become his concubine.
Very crude (and sexist), but somehow, apt.
  #58  
Old 11-14-2018, 08:15 AM
filmstar-en filmstar-en is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Posts: 880
The mega document produced by May and all those hard working civil servants cover the terms of the Withdrawal from the EU which will involve a transition period during which the UK will be neither in nor out.

What it does not cover is a trade deal to replace EU membershiip. Trade deals are long drawn out negotiations that take a few years to agree and every one of those 27 countries in the EU could raise issues that slow down and process. This happened with the EU-Canada deal which took 7 years. An EU-UK deal will be a lot bigger and more complicated.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics...al-post-brexit

We haven't really heard much from the EU about this, but their deliberations could prove very drawn out and there very little any UK politician could do about it. I am sure they remember Farage and his triumphant Brexit speech to the EU. The EU does not owe the UK any favours.

It makes me wonder how long this transition process is going to take and when the UK will be free to negotiate deals outside of the EU. How long in Limbo?

I think Brexit will be a 10 year project that will keep the next few UK governments very busy indeed. If the UK crashes out, the problems of building an new agreement afterwards are still there.

The British public still have no idea what the problem is. They do not see any crisis ahead, just a lot of politicians squabbling about obscure issues to do with trade. It is a 'phoney war' and they should just 'get on with it'.

That has to change.
  #59  
Old 11-14-2018, 09:48 AM
Stanislaus Stanislaus is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: London
Posts: 2,860
I'm trying to work out the path and potential sticking points for the WA:

1) Cabinet today. Plan is for cabinet to approve; potential for resignations which could trigger leadership challenge.
2) Tory MPs read it tomorrow. They should wait for the vote; potentially could trigger leadership challenge.
3) "Meaningful" vote in Parliament. Lots of things could happen here which boil down to: WA passes as is, WA passes amended by Parliament, WA voted down. The vote will be mildly chaotic as MPs from both the Remain/Soft Brexit and Hard Brexit divides (none of whom will be any too happy with the agreement) try to decide what will happen to a) Brexit, b) their party and c) them personally if the WA is voted down. Would it mean a general election? Renegotiation with Brussells? No Deal? A second referendum? All of the above? People with very different attitudes to Brexit could plausibly end up voting against the WA motion because they also have very different expectations of what that No vote would lead to.*
4) Approval by the EU. Should be straightforward if Parliament hasn't thrown in any significant and/or wrecking amendments, but we'll cross that bridge when we've negotiated the preceding tightrope.


*It's pretty clear that the Labour leadership hope and expect a No vote to lead to a general election, which they'd likely win. So any Labour MPs who vote for the WA because they think that's best for the country are going to be mighty unpopular with the leadership, colleagues and some proportion of grassroots members. "You voted to keep the Tories in power, you centrist melt" isn't an accusation many will want to face.
  #60  
Old 11-14-2018, 10:03 AM
SanVito SanVito is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: The Big Smoke
Posts: 4,285
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stanislaus View Post
*It's pretty clear that the Labour leadership hope and expect a No vote to lead to a general election, which they'd likely win. So any Labour MPs who vote for the WA because they think that's best for the country are going to be mighty unpopular with the leadership, colleagues and some proportion of grassroots members. "You voted to keep the Tories in power, you centrist melt" isn't an accusation many will want to face.
Bolding mine. Not sure I'd agree with this at all. As disastrous as the Tories have been, Labour have done nothing to capitalise on it. And I speak as a Labour voter.
  #61  
Old 11-14-2018, 10:05 AM
DCTrekkie DCTrekkie is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Dorset, UK
Posts: 208
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nava View Post
Velocity, the majority of electoral-college voters voted for Trump in 2016: would he stop being president if a poll taken of those same people now said a chunk of them have changed their mind? In the UK, the majority of people who voted did vote for Brexit. "I changed my mind" doesn't work for this kind of situation.
Hopefully that's exactly what will happen in 2020.

Why go ahead with something the public doesn't want, just because they thought differently 2 years ago.


Quote:
Originally Posted by UDS View Post
Yes, all this.

Plus also the question of timing. As of right now, the UK is on an inexorable course to quit the EU on 29 March 2019. That is almost certainly not enough time for the UK to take the legislative, administrative and practical steps and processes that a referendum would require, so they'd need to agree an extension of time with the EU, and this would require the unamimous consent of the 27 other member states of the EU. This consent is unlikely to be forthcoming unless allowing time for another referendum afforded a good prospect of a materially better outcome (from the EU's point of view) than not allowing time would.

Tl;dr: At this point a second referendum is only feasible if the EU-27 all agree that it would be a good idea.
The EU have said that they would be happy for the UK to cancel Brexit. The guy who wrote the "Article 50" withdrawal document has said that the intention was for a leaver to cancel with or without the EU's agreement, and there's a court case soon to confirm whether that's legally the case. The only people saying that we can't cancel the withdrawAl are the brexiteers who are scared they might still lose.
  #62  
Old 11-14-2018, 10:25 AM
Stanislaus Stanislaus is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: London
Posts: 2,860
Quote:
Originally Posted by SanVito View Post
Bolding mine. Not sure I'd agree with this at all. As disastrous as the Tories have been, Labour have done nothing to capitalise on it. And I speak as a Labour voter.
Yes, sure. But if a general election is called because the Tory government has collapsed due to internal feuding over how it fucked up Brexit, they Tories won't be in any position to campaign. Right now, Labour should be ahead in the polls but aren't - but there's no way they wouldn't have the edge over a Tory party that's a) visibly screwed up and b) is tearing itself apart.

Anyhow, my main point is that this is how Labour are thinking of their chances - hence their motivation to vote the WA down. Whether, in the era of the FTPA, that's enough to actually force an election, is another question.

Last edited by Stanislaus; 11-14-2018 at 10:26 AM.
  #63  
Old 11-14-2018, 10:30 AM
Velocity Velocity is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Posts: 13,052
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nava View Post
Velocity, the majority of electoral-college voters voted for Trump in 2016: would he stop being president if a poll taken of those same people now said a chunk of them have changed their mind? In the UK, the majority of people who voted did vote for Brexit. "I changed my mind" doesn't work for this kind of situation.
But the U.S. presidential election results are legally binding. AIUI, isn't there really no force of law to make Brexit go forward, other than everyone hem-hawing, "Well, since the vote happened, we have to do it" despite the referendum having no real binding power?
  #64  
Old 11-14-2018, 11:28 AM
PatrickLondon PatrickLondon is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Location: London
Posts: 2,995
As with most aspects of our politico-constitutional set-up, it comes down to MPs' judgement as to what the voters will let them get away with. Of course, the sovereignty of "the Crown in Parliament" means they could in theory say the referendum result can be put aside (could always have), but you don't have to imagine very hard to see how that would play. But on the other hand, another referendum or another general election would just as likely come to an unsustainably inconclusive result. Indeed it's not impossible that the MPs' own votes will be pretty chaotic, in their relation (or lack of it) to coherent party positions for the future.

And David Cameron reportedly imagines he could come back as Foreign Secretary.....
  #65  
Old 11-14-2018, 11:56 AM
Stanislaus Stanislaus is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: London
Posts: 2,860
Quote:
Originally Posted by Velocity View Post
But the U.S. presidential election results are legally binding. AIUI, isn't there really no force of law to make Brexit go forward, other than everyone hem-hawing, "Well, since the vote happened, we have to do it" despite the referendum having no real binding power?
Quote:
Originally Posted by PatrickLondon View Post
As with most aspects of our politico-constitutional set-up, it comes down to MPs' judgement as to what the voters will let them get away with. Of course, the sovereignty of "the Crown in Parliament" means they could in theory say the referendum result can be put aside (could always have), but you don't have to imagine very hard to see how that would play. But on the other hand, another referendum or another general election would just as likely come to an unsustainably inconclusive result. Indeed it's not impossible that the MPs' own votes will be pretty chaotic, in their relation (or lack of it) to coherent party positions for the future.

And David Cameron reportedly imagines he could come back as Foreign Secretary.....
Within the UK, there's no force of law behind the referendum result. As PatrickLondon says, it's about political realities.

However, the UK did go ahead and submit Article 50 notification (following a vote in Parliament). Article 50 of the Treaty of the European Union is pretty straightforward, and one of the most straightforward things about it is that the member state which wishes to exit will do so 2 years after submitting notification, unless both parties agree to an extension. The 2 years gives time to negotiate a Withdrawal Agreement but in the event that 2 years pass without such an agreement, exit happens nonetheless. As things stand, the UK will exit the EU on 29th March 2019, by force of law.

It is possible that, should the UK government fall, or Parliament vote down the WA, the EU would consent to extending the deadline so that both parties can come back to the table and try again. But they don't have to, and they'd have to be pretty sure the UK could commit to the resulting deal second time round or what would be the point of granting more time?

It is also possible, but less so, that the UK could wihdraw its A50 notification and just stay in the EU. It's not yet clear whether this is legally possible (a court case to seek a ruling on this is currently underway); even if it is legal, it's unclear that this is a viable political move. I mean, it may be! It's possible that people are sufficiently hacked off with the whole Brexit thing to tolerate just backing out of it. But really you'd want to have won a general election on the explicit promise to do so, rather than just doing it off your own bat and telling people to trust you, you know what you're doing.
  #66  
Old 11-14-2018, 02:33 PM
Elendil's Heir Elendil's Heir is offline
SDSAB
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: my Herkimer Battle Jitney
Posts: 80,450
Yeesh. What a mess.
  #67  
Old 11-14-2018, 02:58 PM
Quartz's Avatar
Quartz Quartz is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Home of the haggis
Posts: 30,136
Apparently the Brexit agreement is 400 pages long. I'm minded of one of my maths teachers who used to say, "If it's long it's wrong."
  #68  
Old 11-14-2018, 03:15 PM
PastTense PastTense is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 7,117
Draft here:
https://ec.europa.eu/commission/site...greement_0.pdf

Could some readers here read it and summarize for the rest of us (the draft is 585 pages long--but it is double-spaced).
  #69  
Old 11-14-2018, 03:23 PM
AK84 AK84 is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 15,778
Well it’s gettinb late here, and I have an early start tomorrow, but first impressions ar with at free movement of persons has been kept in essence the same way, with only some changes to form.
Looks like Farage lost this argument.
Concubinage it is!
  #70  
Old 11-14-2018, 03:31 PM
Velocity Velocity is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Posts: 13,052
This mess will probably deter any other EU nations from Brexiting; if anything, it probably strengthened the EU.
  #71  
Old 11-14-2018, 04:49 PM
Quartz's Avatar
Quartz Quartz is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Home of the haggis
Posts: 30,136
Quote:
Originally Posted by PastTense View Post
Draft here:
https://ec.europa.eu/commission/site...greement_0.pdf

Could some readers here read it and summarize for the rest of us (the draft is 585 pages long--but it is double-spaced).
I've just downloaded it. I've dined too well to analyse it tonight.
  #72  
Old 11-14-2018, 05:49 PM
Slow Moving Vehicle's Avatar
Slow Moving Vehicle Slow Moving Vehicle is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Atlanta, Georgia
Posts: 3,361
Quote:
Originally Posted by Quartz View Post
I've just downloaded it. I've dined too well to analyse it tonight.
Nothing like a little light reading for the john.
  #73  
Old 11-14-2018, 06:55 PM
Malden Capell Malden Capell is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: London
Posts: 2,182
The ERG are mobilising, apparently, to trigger a no-confidence vote with the Chair of the 1922 Committee.

It's been mentioned on Twitter that this might not be specifically to unseat May, but to run down the clock. They fear that if the WA reaches the Commons, then 'no deal' is out of picture, and there'd be amendments to further soften the WA. Anathema to Brexit cultists.

But a leadership contest would paralyse parliament up to Christmas at least, meaning almost no time for the deal to be considered by parliament.

Good grief.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
  #74  
Old 11-14-2018, 06:56 PM
Quartz's Avatar
Quartz Quartz is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Home of the haggis
Posts: 30,136
Quote:
Originally Posted by Slow Moving Vehicle View Post
Nothing like a little light reading for the john.
The bath, TYVM. Nothing like a nice soak with a book or a printout.

But the thing desperately needs a summary, a table of contents, and an index.
  #75  
Old 11-14-2018, 07:13 PM
Quartz's Avatar
Quartz Quartz is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Home of the haggis
Posts: 30,136
Quote:
Originally Posted by Malden Capell View Post
But a leadership contest would paralyse parliament up to Christmas at least, meaning almost no time for the deal to be considered by parliament.

Good grief.
Turnabout is fair play. People complained about the delay in invoking Article 50. People complained about the law suits by the Remainers. And so on. So now we get to complain about delaying tactics by the Leavers.

I do want this to be a good deal for Britain. But no deal is better than a bad deal - it was a bad initial deal and the contempt the EU elites held for the UK that got us into this mess (and similarly the contempt of the elites got Trump elected in the US). So it's got to be a good deal.

BTW I've just done a quick search of the document for fish - of particular importance hereabouts - and it seems like complete and abject surrender. Article 130 FWIW.

Quote:
As regards the fixing of fishing opportunities within the meaning of Article 43(3) TFEU for any period falling within the transition period, the United Kingdom shall be consulted in respect of the fishing opportunities related to the United Kingdom, including in the context of the preparation of relevant international consultations and negotiations.
Bolding mine. That's in relation to our own waters!

No change from the present. But a full read may reveal that I'm wrong (I hope so) and a different and better interpretation.
  #76  
Old 11-14-2018, 07:38 PM
PastTense PastTense is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 7,117
Quartz: Scottish Tory MPs are also concerned about this:
Quote:
Scottish Conservative MPs have written to the Prime Minister to raise their concern over fishing rights post-Brexit as Theresa May looks to build support for a Brexit deal.

In the letter, the 13 MPs said they would not support an agreement with the EU which would prevent the UK from independently negotiating access and quota shares.

Mrs May had previously agreed to calls from the Scottish Conservatives to exit the Common Fisheries Policy by the end of 2020.
https://www.eveningexpress.co.uk/new...-letter-to-pm/
  #77  
Old 11-14-2018, 08:11 PM
UDS UDS is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Australia
Posts: 8,450
Quote:
Originally Posted by Quartz View Post
BTW I've just done a quick search of the document for fish - of particular importance hereabouts - and it seems like complete and abject surrender. Article 130 FWIW.



Bolding mine. That's in relation to our own waters!

No change from the present. But a full read may reveal that I'm wrong (I hope so) and a different and better interpretation.
But that's only during the transition period (March 2019 - December 2020), which is supposed to be a 'no immediate change to anything" period. It would be very surprising if the UK were given autonomy on fishing (or anything else) during the transition period, and I don't think anybody expected it.
  #78  
Old 11-14-2018, 08:28 PM
filmstar-en filmstar-en is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Posts: 880
The fishing industry is very small potatoes in terms of the UK economy and employs only a few thousand people. There are bigger fish to fry.
  #79  
Old 11-14-2018, 11:09 PM
Northern Piper Northern Piper is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jun 1999
Location: The snow is back.
Posts: 27,996
Quote:
Originally Posted by filmstar-en View Post
What it does not cover is a trade deal to replace EU membershiip. Trade deals are long drawn out negotiations that take a few years to agree and every one of those 27 countries in the EU could raise issues that slow down and process. This happened with the EU-Canada deal which took 7 years.

And the Canada-EU deal almost got scuppered by one province in Belgium which didn't like the deal.

Once you're outside looking in, you have much less control than when you're inside with a seat at the table.
  #80  
Old 11-15-2018, 12:11 AM
Elendil's Heir Elendil's Heir is offline
SDSAB
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: my Herkimer Battle Jitney
Posts: 80,450
Quote:
Originally Posted by filmstar-en View Post
The fishing industry is very small potatoes in terms of the UK economy and employs only a few thousand people. There are bigger fish to fry.
Reminded me of this exchange, in a very different context:

Joseph Hewes: "Mr. Jefferson, nowhere do you mention deep-sea fishing rights."

[Everyone in Congress groans in frustration]

John Adams: "Oh, good God! Fishing rights? How long is this piddling to go on? We have been here for three solid days! We have endured, by my count, more than eighty-five separate changes and the removal of close to four hundred words. Now, would you whip it and beat it 'til you break its spirit?...."

From the musical 1776.
  #81  
Old 11-15-2018, 02:15 AM
Malden Capell Malden Capell is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: London
Posts: 2,182
Quote:
Originally Posted by Quartz View Post
Turnabout is fair play. People complained about the delay in invoking Article 50. People complained about the law suits by the Remainers. And so on. So now we get to complain about delaying tactics by the Leavers.



I do want this to be a good deal for Britain. But no deal is better than a bad deal - it was a bad initial deal and the contempt the EU elites held for the UK that got us into this mess (and similarly the contempt of the elites got Trump elected in the US). So it's got to be a good deal.
For the umpteenth time. This isn't elites v people. That's a false narrative to paper over the bankruptcy of the Brexit cause. Give it up, quartz. No amount of elites v people fairytales is going to bypass the real obstacles to Brexit ever working, which people like you have flatly refuse to engaged with, and clung to your fantasies.

No deal is the [b]worst[/] deal for Britain, as everyone who knows anything about trade has been warning for two years. That's not elites telling you that. It's trade experts and businessmen. Please think for once and recognise that.



Quote:
BTW I've just done a quick search of the document for fish - of particular importance hereabouts - and it seems like complete and abject surrender. Article 130 FWIW.



Bolding mine. That's in relation to our own waters!



No change from the present. But a full read may reveal that I'm wrong (I hope so) and a different and better interpretation.

I'm not surprised there's no change. The Leave plans for British fishing after Brexit were always daft and unworkable. Oh, sorry, that's what the elites say, so yes, unicorns are real.



Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
  #82  
Old 11-15-2018, 02:18 AM
Malden Capell Malden Capell is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: London
Posts: 2,182
Anyone else notice May said it's between her deal, no deal, and no Brexit at all?


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
  #83  
Old 11-15-2018, 04:13 AM
Malden Capell Malden Capell is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: London
Posts: 2,182
Dominic Raab, the Brexit Secretary, has resigned.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
  #84  
Old 11-15-2018, 04:36 AM
AK84 AK84 is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 15,778
Will May be PM for long? Will the Tories survive?
  #85  
Old 11-15-2018, 04:37 AM
Baron Greenback's Avatar
Baron Greenback Baron Greenback is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Scotland
Posts: 11,316
Quote:
Originally Posted by Malden Capell View Post
Dominic Raab, the Brexit Secretary, has resigned.
To lose one Brexit Secretary may be regarded as misfortune, to lose two...
  #86  
Old 11-15-2018, 05:20 AM
AK84 AK84 is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 15,778
The EU should partition the UK before it gives them their independence. Probably the country will split into pro and anti treaty factions, who’ll fight it out,
Oh, wait, that sounds familiar... why?
  #87  
Old 11-15-2018, 05:21 AM
Quartz's Avatar
Quartz Quartz is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Home of the haggis
Posts: 30,136
Quote:
Originally Posted by Malden Capell View Post
For the umpteenth time. This isn't elites v people. That's a false narrative to paper over the bankruptcy of the Brexit cause.
I'm sorry but it isn't a false narrative. People saw Cameron get sent away with a pat on the head. People saw the patronising attitudes of the EU to their concerns. People saw their concerns over immigration being conflated with racism. And so on.
  #88  
Old 11-15-2018, 05:25 AM
Quartz's Avatar
Quartz Quartz is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Home of the haggis
Posts: 30,136
Quote:
Originally Posted by UDS View Post
But that's only during the transition period (March 2019 - December 2020),
That's good.
  #89  
Old 11-15-2018, 05:33 AM
Malden Capell Malden Capell is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: London
Posts: 2,182
Brexit - general discussion thread

Quote:
Originally Posted by Quartz View Post
I'm sorry but it isn't a false narrative. People saw Cameron get sent away with a pat on the head.
Could you spell what you *think* he demanded and got turned down for?

Quote:
People saw the patronising attitudes of the EU to their concerns.
What concerns? Spell them out. Don't be vague. And explain why they're the EU's problems rather than Westminster's, and finally if it's reasonable to expect the EU to accommodate them.

Quote:
People saw their concerns over immigration being conflated with racism. And so on.

So that magically makes something that cannot logically exist exist, does it?


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Last edited by Malden Capell; 11-15-2018 at 05:34 AM.
  #90  
Old 11-15-2018, 05:37 AM
Quartz's Avatar
Quartz Quartz is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Home of the haggis
Posts: 30,136
Quote:
Originally Posted by Malden Capell View Post
The Leave plans for British fishing after Brexit were always daft and unworkable.
What plans? As I recall, there were no plans.
  #91  
Old 11-15-2018, 05:57 AM
Malden Capell Malden Capell is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: London
Posts: 2,182
Quote:
Originally Posted by Quartz View Post
What plans? As I recall, there were no plans.
They went about as far as 'take control of our waters'. Daft, unworkable, and the lack of detail extremely telling.
  #92  
Old 11-15-2018, 07:02 AM
filmstar-en filmstar-en is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Posts: 880
My mum voted for Brexit because she doesn't like the idea of immigration and wanted to give those Posh gits like Cameron a big kick up the backside.

She does not understand or care much for what Brussels does. As far as she is concerned it is where sprouts come from.

International trade and the workings of the economy are something the pompous politicians talk about endlessly in the news. She would only pay attention if it was something to do with the NHS, which is always under threat and must be saved. She is rather bemused that the has expressed the 'democratic will of the people' by voting for Brexit. But likes the idea that the NHS will get more money. She thought it was like calling the bank and cancelling a subscription you don't need so you can use the money for something more important. I don't think she likes being asked to vote on stuff like this, it is not her job to be up on all this sort of thing. She likes General Elections every few years, but politicians can't make up the mind about something they should resign and hand over to another lot that have better ideas.

On her last point, I am in full agreement. The Tories in melt down will mean another General Election on the horizon.
  #93  
Old 11-15-2018, 07:16 AM
Stanislaus Stanislaus is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: London
Posts: 2,860
This is madness:

Quote:
Sir Edward Leigh, a Tory Brexiter, asks what happens if Dominic Raab is correct. What happens if May loses the vote in the Commons. Will May deliver Brexit whatever?

May says she is determined that the UK will leave the EU on 29 March, “whatever happens in between”
It's not a question of whether May is determined or not. The UK is on track to leave the EU on 29 March, in exactly the same way that people who jump out of planes are on track to smash into the ground. There are some specific actions they can take to avoid that fate, but failing that ground-smashing is what's going to happen.

The UK will leave the EU on the 29th of March with or without a deal unless: a) the EU and the UK agree to extend the negotiation period or b) somehow, the UK withdraws its A50 notification.

If May loses the vote, all that happens is that exit without a deal becomes more likely. Brexit is not imperilled in any way.
  #94  
Old 11-15-2018, 07:45 AM
AK84 AK84 is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 15,778
If by "this" you mean "Brexit", then yes.
  #95  
Old 11-15-2018, 07:47 AM
Stanislaus Stanislaus is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: London
Posts: 2,860
Quote:
Originally Posted by AK84 View Post
If by "this" you mean "Brexit", then yes.
It's fractal madness - zoom in or out, examine at any scale, and each snapshot is as mad as the next.

Last edited by Stanislaus; 11-15-2018 at 07:49 AM.
  #96  
Old 11-15-2018, 08:07 AM
Northern Piper Northern Piper is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jun 1999
Location: The snow is back.
Posts: 27,996
Brexit - general discussion thread

Why did Raab resign? Wasn't he involved in reaching the most recent plan?

Last edited by Northern Piper; 11-15-2018 at 08:09 AM.
  #97  
Old 11-15-2018, 08:09 AM
Northern Piper Northern Piper is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jun 1999
Location: The snow is back.
Posts: 27,996
At what point does this become a confidence measure under the new fixed election rules? If May loses the vote on the 400 page Leave plan, does that trigger an election?
  #98  
Old 11-15-2018, 08:34 AM
Stanislaus Stanislaus is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: London
Posts: 2,860
Quote:
Originally Posted by Northern Piper View Post
At what point does this become a confidence measure under the new fixed election rules? If May loses the vote on the 400 page Leave plan, does that trigger an election?
This is more complex than it seems (see fractal madness, above) but basically no.

The Fixed Term Parliament Act says that there are two ways to call a new election only:

1a) The government loses a specifically worded no-confidence motion
1b) 14 days later, the government loses a subsequent specific no-confidence motion.

OR

2) For two-thirds of MPs (434 out of 650) to vote for an early election*.

Previously, any vote could be deemed a no-confidence vote by the government (who would say so in advance). This has somewhat been superseded by the need for a specific no-confidence motion but there is still some ambiguity about whether a sufficiently important vote (i.e. this, Budget, Queen's Speech) would still count as a vote in 1a above, or whether that defeat would need to be followed up with a specific no-confidence vote. You can guess easily enough how the current government is likely to feel about this.

But in any case, losing one vote won't do it. We're looking at at least two, 14 days apart. Or to put it another way, slightly more than 10% of the time between now and 29th March.

*(There are not 434 MPs currently excited about the prospect of a new election).
  #99  
Old 11-15-2018, 08:37 AM
Stanislaus Stanislaus is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: London
Posts: 2,860
Quote:
Originally Posted by Northern Piper View Post
Why did Raab resign? Wasn't he involved in reaching the most recent plan?
You might think that, given that he was Secretary of State for Exiting the EU. But he would claim that the negotiations were handled by civil servants answering directly to the PM and that he had little or no say, especially as he's only been in post a short time.

You might also think that "I failed to impose myself against Theresa May to stand up for Brexit" is not the best pitch for party leadership, but you go with what you've got, I suppose.
  #100  
Old 11-15-2018, 08:54 AM
Elendil's Heir Elendil's Heir is offline
SDSAB
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: my Herkimer Battle Jitney
Posts: 80,450
I'm not a Brit, but I would kind of expect that the Brexit secretary would, you know, be in charge of handling Brexit. But that's just me.
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:30 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.

Send questions for Cecil Adams to: cecil@straightdope.com

Send comments about this website to: webmaster@straightdope.com

Terms of Use / Privacy Policy

Advertise on the Straight Dope!
(Your direct line to thousands of the smartest, hippest people on the planet, plus a few total dipsticks.)

Copyright 2018 STM Reader, LLC.

 
Copyright © 2017