• 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 (so long and thanks for all the fish)

nayimfromthehalfwayline said:
Tusk: 'Anything could be possible'


Speaking at a press conference on the second day of the EU summit, European Council president Donald Tusk says the Brexit delay plan announced by the EU last night means that until 12 April "anything could be possible: a deal, a long extension if the UK decides to rethink its strategy or decides to revoke Article 50".
Click to expand...

It wouldn't be if he'd stuck to his original line on the extension.
 
nayimfromthehalfwayline said:
https://twitter.com/x/status/1109102718793195521
Click to expand...

I wonder if an amendment ruling out a referendum will be tabled again, be interesting to see what other amendments are tabled.

How would indicative votes even work though? It sounds good in theory but no one has actually explained it. Wouldn't it be better to go through options in a different way e.g. does the house want to be able to set it's own trade deals, does it want to continue or end freedom of movement, does it want to be removed from the ECJ etc. From there you could construct a position around it - saying I want common market 2.0 doesn't really say much as such a thing doesn't exist.
 
P.D. said:
I wonder if an amendment ruling out a referendum will be tabled again, be interesting to see what other amendments are tabled.

How would indicative votes even work though? It sounds good in theory but no one has actually explained it. Wouldn't it be better to go through options in a different way e.g. does the house want to be able to set it's own trade deals, does it want to continue or end freedom of movement, does it want to be removed from the ECJ etc. From there you could construct a position around it - saying I want common market 2.0 doesn't really say much as such a thing doesn't exist.
Click to expand...

Sounds good to me. It's become fashionable to criticise May for refusing to compromise on her 'red lines', but to me they mostly represent a reasonable enough interpretation of 'leave'. It would be interesting therefore to see exactly which of them MP's would vote down when challenged to do so in such a transparent process.
 
Last edited:
P.D. said:
I wonder if an amendment ruling out a referendum will be tabled again, be interesting to see what other amendments are tabled.

How would indicative votes even work though? It sounds good in theory but no one has actually explained it. Wouldn't it be better to go through options in a different way e.g. does the house want to be able to set it's own trade deals, does it want to continue or end freedom of movement, does it want to be removed from the ECJ etc. From there you could construct a position around it - saying I want common market 2.0 doesn't really say much as such a thing doesn't exist.
Click to expand...

As I understand it (and totally stand to be corrected) all available options are voted on, with the one that gets the least votes being dropped and then another round of voting taking place, rinse and repeat until only one option remains.

Would appear those options are (at least rumoured):
PM deal, revocation, second ref, deal + customs union, deal + customs + single market, FTA or no deal

Though I agree with you, seems much more constructive to focus on requirements before the solution!
 
nayimfromthehalfwayline said:
As I understand it (and totally stand to be corrected) all available options are voted on, with the one that gets the least votes being dropped and then another round of voting taking place, rinse and repeat until only one option remains.

Would appear those options are (at least rumoured):
PM deal, revocation, second ref, deal + customs union, deal + customs + single market, FTA or no deal

Though I agree with you, seems much more constructive to focus on requirements before the solution!
Click to expand...

Agreed, the order of those options would be impossible to agree on as well. Plus how do we even know the indicative options are even options, no one has run some them past the EU or EFTA yet?
 
Parklaner81 said:
I've never said it was a good deal. What I have said is that it might have been the best of a bad set of options in the circumstances that prevailed. I said just yesterday or the day before on here that my opinion on that wasn't fixed. I'm now moving back towards favouring no deal. Not that I think for a minute it will happen.

But not for the first time, you've avoided a specific point and tried to make it into a wider issue. I asked you whether you objected to a transition period at the time that it was negotiated. You haven't answered but that's fine, I suspect I already know ;)
Click to expand...

Why would we want someting worse for our nation? That to me is gonads. The deal isn't close to the best option, and its MPs job to look out for the nation, and protect us. You might not appreciate it, but if in 2-3 years time we have a terrible trade deal from the EU, and all we can do is accept it or stay a vassal state taking EU laws we have input or say over, where is the good in that?

I haven't avoided a specific point. Are you asking me if I object to leaving the EU via a transition period? Of course! When May's deal was published it look like it was reasonable - in the sense that it seemed to deliver what a third of the people might have voted for - control of laws and ending free movement. I didn't understand at the time, it does neither of those things. All it does is agree that we'll pay the EU to leave, protect the rights of people in the EU and europeans in the UK, and ensure there is no border in Ireland while trade negotiations take place. The stuff about free movement and even the laws bit, are far from decided. There would be years of negotiation where we want x and y and they want something in return - no hard boarder in Ireland (aka customs unsion), free movement or a way to rule over trade law (by the ECJ).

At some point you have to see that we can't keep trying to do the 'wrong thing righter'. The bad set of options is Brexit. Sooner that hits home the quicker we can move on and sort out the UK without this gonads.
 
Last edited:
ricky2tricky4city said:
I'm not voting for it because you want me too:p
Click to expand...

I want you to do whatever you like. If you feel Brexit is a sham, a waste of time, then vote for it. If you think Brexit has value, I'd love to hear what it is you're hoping to see from it. Maybe I'll convert to your vision :)
 
Last edited:
Parklaner81 said:
Their original response was fine with me. Short extension on condition of passing the deal. Did we even ask for the additional options, or have they just taken matters into their own hands there?
Click to expand...

They did agree a short extension on condition of passing the deal. You're upset they put in a contingency if the deal does not pass? We don't know if May asked for it, but presuably did. If her deal does not pass we need time to either leave with no deal or prepare something else. Leaving with no deal requires a lot more planning. So the EUs actions have been exactly what we needed. And it is ultimately up to the UK. We choose what happens next.

The only people who expected the EU to roll over for us and give us a fairytale agreement, that was better than their own memebers get, were those (mis)selling Leave. Another confirmed porkie. "Easiest deal in history" etc.
 
Last edited:
SpurMeUp said:
They did agree a short extension on condition of passing the deal. You're upset they put in a contingency if the deal does not pass? We don't know if May asked for it, but presuably did. If her deal does not pass we need time to either leave with no deal or prepare something else. Leaving with no deal requires a lot more planning. So the EUs actions have been exactly what we needed. And it is ultimately up to the UK. We choose what happens next.
Click to expand...

Unless it was requested by the UK government then yes, absolutely I am. And I struggle to imagine that it would have been, seeing as it clearly reduces further the prospect of government policy (the WA) materialising. Introducing the prospect of a long delay - which I believe May explicitly ruled out when requesting the extension - amounts to nothing less than a clear manipulation of the circumstances on the EU's part in favour of such a delay, as far as I can see.
 
Gutter Boy said:
I said I'd engage in civil disobedience - so more Ghandi than Che Guevara.

But there's already that yellow jacket plan to block all the roundabouts on 29 March and things like.

I would boycott another EU referendum if it is held before 2056 (the 'for a generation' that was promised). There's no point if the losers are too autocratic to turnover power
Click to expand...

You see my problem with you here is that leave only just won, yet when Scotland rejected indy by 10% you still think the indy nutters are right and they should get another vote.
Hypocrite, not you eh.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DTA
SpurMeUp said:
I want you to do whatever you like. If you feel Brexit is a sham, a waste of time, then vote for it. If you think Brexit has value, I'd love to hear what it is you're hoping to see from it. Maybe I'll convert to your vision :)
Click to expand...

I was just having a bit of fun imitating our beloved MPs behaviour when they think the EU are bullying them:)

My current position I clearly stated a few pages back.
 
Parklaner81 said:
Unless it was requested by the UK government then yes, absolutely I am. And I struggle to imagine that it would have been, seeing as it clearly reduces further the prospect of government policy (the WA) materialising. Introducing the prospect of a long delay - which I believe May explicitly ruled out when requesting the extension - amounts to nothing less than a clear manipulation of the circumstances on the EU's part in favour of such a delay, as far as I can see.
Click to expand...

So let me get this straight... You are upset that the EU is giving the UK more than one option?

You want the EU to dictate to the Uk what our one option would be?
 
Last edited:
Parklaner81 said:
Unless it was requested by the UK government then yes, absolutely I am. And I struggle to imagine that it would have been, seeing as it clearly reduces further the prospect of government policy (the WA) materialising. Introducing the prospect of a long delay - which I believe May explicitly ruled out when requesting the extension - amounts to nothing less than a clear manipulation of the circumstances on the EU's part in favour of such a delay, as far as I can see.
Click to expand...

How does more time "clearly reduce future prospect of government policy"? Its the opposit. And April the 12th is not a "long delay". Never mind.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back