• Dear Guest, Please note that adult content is not permitted on this forum. We have had our Google ads disabled at times due to some posts that were found from some time ago. Please do not post adult content and if you see any already on the forum, please report the post so that we can deal with it. Adult content is allowed in the glory hole - you will have to request permission to access it. Thanks, scara

Politics, politics, politics

the dza said:
Why do you think May has recently started to say "it's my deal, no deal or no Brexit"? She has never said this until recently, now she has started repeating it. Now we have the ECJ saying we can unilaterally revoke Article 50.

Grieve's amendment was voted through last week, allowing MPs to vote on amendments to May's deal if/when it is defeated. Someone will table an amendment to then take no-deal off the table, because now we have the option to revoke Article 50 and stay on current terms. No deal is dead imo.
Click to expand...
Revoking article 50 would require MPs to go against the result of the referendum - there will not be a majority for that, there never has been.

That means, in order to get such a majority we would need an election. That would require a vote of no confidence. There are not enough MPs who would vote for that, because the default result of it would be Corbyn.
 
Don't we sort of get 'no Brexit' if they just postpone the deadline for the withdrawal date of 29th March 2019 indefinitely aka until a second referendum to ask "are you sure you really want to leave btw?"
 
glorygloryeze said:
Don't we sort of get 'no Brexit' if they just postpone the deadline for the withdrawal date of 29th March 2019 indefinitely aka until a second referendum to ask "are you sure you really want to leave btw?"
Click to expand...
I think the proper format of the 2nd referendum (as with previous EU referendums) is "No, that wasn't the answer we wanted. Keep voting until you get it right."
 
scaramanga said:
Revoking article 50 would require MPs to go against the result of the referendum - there will not be a majority for that, there never has been.

That means, in order to get such a majority we would need an election. That would require a vote of no confidence. There are not enough MPs who would vote for that, because the default result of it would be Corbyn.
Click to expand...
No meaningful Labour vote, be that Referendum or GE will mean there is enough votes for revoking A50 if the alternative is No deal or Mays Deal IMO. I think you will get enough votes with those who vote for it saying "its to give us more power in negotiation" etc. and we will go back to the table.
 
Got to hand it to May; she has played the "we will eventually remain" game like a true pro-EU trooper.
Sadly, the Brexiter MPs have been either too dumb or too naive to let he get away with it and without shouting out alternative 'no deal' plans from the get-go.

F me; how depressing! Once this process finished we will NEVER be able to leave the EU unless via riots and public disorder breakdowns across the continent.

Juncker and Tusk must be laughing their socks off!
 
The brick show has played out because she has gone from "No deal is better than a bad deal" to "my bad deal is better than no deal but actually why don't we just cancel Brexit".

She is a brick bluffer, but a remainer at heart so win-win for her
 
But we were promised that negotiations and transition would be a piece of tinkle!

We haven’t even started free trade talks yet.

Haven’t heard one leaver hold their hands up and admit negotiations were harder than expected and we were not able to dictate terms as promised. Instead it’s May being rubbish, the EU being meanies...anything but the reality.

What price will leavers accept for Brexit? It’s already impacting what we can spend on services like schools and hospitals, but it’s all worthwhile? I fail to see what we get back at all. We control freedom of movement and maybe a few more laws no one cares about. Great!


Sitting on my porcelain throne using glory-glory.co.uk mobile app
 
From the very beginning May and her government should have started planning for no deal, so EU know we're serious and not apologetic about leaving.
Negotiations would have started from a position of them actually knowing we are serious (and not diluted by the likes of Soubry and other Remainer MPs publicly wailing and calling effectively for the result to be voided).
A) Our negotiating hand would have been better used
B) if the EU were indeed content with no-deal we at least would be much better prepared right now and could have allowed a no-deal option at least to happen until a decent enough deal to be negitiated that is actually us leaving and not BINO

Horrible!
 
glorygloryeze said:
The brick show has played out because she has gone from "No deal is better than a bad deal" to "my bad deal is better than no deal but actually why don't we just cancel Brexit".

She is a brick bluffer, but a remainer at heart so win-win for her
Click to expand...

What would you do now?

No deal better than a bad deal was a negotiating position, and she’d claim her deal is decent - it is compared to a no deal Brexit which would cause car manufacturers and fiancé jobs to leave for the Eu, customs mayhem, the pound to fall further etc

What are leavers suggestions? Can’t always blame someone else for Brexit not working while offering no vision for what should happen.


Sitting on my porcelain throne using glory-glory.co.uk mobile app
 
glorygloryeze said:
From the very beginning May and her government should have started planning for no deal, so EU know we're serious and not apologetic about leaving.
Negotiations would have started from a position of them actually knowing we are serious (and not diluted by the likes of Soubry and other Remainer MPs publicly wailing and calling effectively for the result to be voided).
A) Our negotiating hand would have been better used
B) if the EU were indeed content with no-deal we at least would be much better prepared right now and could have allowed a no-deal option at least to happen until a decent enough deal to be negitiated that is actually us leaving and not BINO

Horrible!
Click to expand...

There is no comfortable no deal exit, because Brexit is a bad idea. That’s the unfortunate truth of it. Being part of a customs union is good. We can’t get a deal that gives us all we want because that would mean being in the EU.

How do you prepare for lost job and investment? Do you spend millions or billions on new customs areas and lorry parks?


Sitting on my porcelain throne using glory-glory.co.uk mobile app
 
Opps double post.

Leave seems to be one delusion after another. Just do x y z and the UK will be a colonial power again. It’s all based on an emotive vision but has no substance. Just like the latest narrative that preparing to leave with no deal would have been an answer. It isn’t and it’s another oversimplification that doesn’t actually work if you examine the complexities of it. Like Brexit itself.
 
Last edited:
SpurMeUp said:
What would you do now?

No deal better than a bad deal was a negotiating position, and she’d claim her deal is decent - it is compared to a no deal Brexit which would cause car manufacturers and fiancé jobs to leave for the Eu, customs mayhem, the pound to fall further etc

What are leavers suggestions? Can’t always blame someone else for Brexit not working while offering no vision for what should happen.


Sitting on my porcelain throne using glory-glory.co.uk mobile app
Click to expand...

I would still go for no deal. We would love some car manufacturers but not all - they came to be here in the first place for several reasons, one of which was access to the EU markets, but our infraastructure, workforce etc will still be around after Brexit even in the event of a no-deal. Similar with Finance; the finance expertise will not disappear overnight even though it likely will reduce for a time. Again, the infrastructure we have will remain (ha!) and The City Of London won't crumble and will be around long afterwards.

Customs Mayhem: well we would have to put in place some form of infrastructure to cope with that for sure, but that's why government exists to solve those issues.
The fall in pound: we'll cross that bridge when it comes to it, but again that's what the Bank of England are for: to manage the economy accordingly.
Then there are the things that we buy from the EU: agricultural products, cars etc: we will still wnat to buy them, will they really not want to sell them to us or make those sales totally prohibitive?

If say, 100M worth of Spanish mangoes aren't bought by us, do they have a ready-made buyer to sell those quantities to instead? Or will they just allow them to rot in the fields?

The way i see it no-deal is not a total disaster but sadly May and our government have acted apologetically like it is.

:(
 
SpurMeUp said:
There is no comfortable no deal exit, because Brexit is a bad idea. That’s the unfortunate truth of it. Being part of a customs union is good. We can’t get a deal that gives us all we want because that would mean being in the EU.

How do you prepare for lost job and investment? Do you spend millions or billions on new customs areas and lorry parks?


Sitting on my porcelain throne using glory-glory.co.uk mobile app
Click to expand...

Life exists outside the EU and will continue to do so.
Like everything in life a government manages the economy accordingly; it's why they are voted in. Eventually you cannot continue to outsource such management and decision-making to the EU.

I could also ask, when the EU loses jobs, goes through a big economic slowdown etc, how do you plan for that?
the difference is if you don't like the management of the economy etc in this country you vote out the incumbents. If Juncker et all show they are managing the EU economy poorly, you can't do anything..
 
glorygloryeze said:
Life exists outside the EU and will continue to do so.
Like everything in life a government manages the economy accordingly; it's why they are voted in. Eventually you cannot continue to outsource such management and decision-making to the EU.

I could also ask, when the EU loses jobs, goes through a big economic slowdown etc, how do you plan for that?
the difference is if you don't like the management of the economy etc in this country you vote out the incumbents. If Juncker et all show they are managing the EU economy poorly, you can't do anything..
Click to expand...

Good posts [emoji106]

Number one: the EU at heart is a customs union allowing free trade. We like that. Almost no one wants to stop open trade. It’s what makes us wealthy and able to spend on the NHS etc

Number two: the EU doesn’t run the UK. We have a sovereign government, we see it and talk about it everyday because it’s dealing with all the core laws. We don’t talk about EU government because it does very little - things mainly around trade. Food safety laws for example. You would t know it from reading the press over the last 20 years but the EUs work is generally good but boring- pollution laws, trade disputes etc. The papers found a way to make it more interesting and appeal to the xenophobe in all of us - take the tinkle out of the Eu and Jonny foreigner telling us what to do. The reality is quite different.

If you can tell me an EU law that negatively affects you day to day I would have more time for Leave.

We manage our economy now, we don’t ‘outsource’ any core things to the EU. The EU won’t go anywhere it will still dominate political influence on our continent - a means to coordinate 27 countries - it’s just that we won’t be able to influence anymore. Trade standards, political responses to the US, Russia, China are stronger via the EU. The UK doesn’t actually matter by itself, far better to work with allies, and talk with authority on the world stage.


Sitting on my porcelain throne using glory-glory.co.uk mobile app
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back