Theresa May wins 'legally binding' Brexit assurances from EU ahead of crucial votes

[dunroaming]

3 minutes ago, AlexRich said:

 

I think we are all sick of it, to be honest. 

 

I hate Brexit, I think it is a mistake. But if I look at May's deal, the original one, the backstop issue strikes me as a non-issue ... even if staying in it forever is a legal possibility, in my view it is a practical impossibility. Neither party would want to be stuck in it.  

 

 

It has certainly done massive damage, no matter where we end up

[bristolboy]

2 minutes ago, AlexRich said:

Because you have a legally binding right to challenge the EU for acting in bad faith, unlike before. You can extract yourself from it unilaterally if bad faith on the part of the EU is shown. But that doesn't cover negotiations getting tied up for legitimate reasons. You can't just decide to walk away unilaterally.

Unless Cox's viewpoint is being misrepresented, that doesn't seem to square with his conclusion. I'm confused.

[AlexRich]

2 minutes ago, LucysDad said:

 

 

I agree with you about the back stop.

 

Equally,, I have believed that neither party wants to trade on poor terms.

 

What I meant to say was practical improbability ... not likely to happen. And a few years after getting the WA through people will look back and wonder why this was ever an issue.

 

[dunroaming]

Apparently some members of ERG are saying that they don't think Cox's comments necessarily kills May's deal.  Wriggle! Wriggle!

[AlexRich]

5 minutes ago, bristolboy said:

Unless Cox's viewpoint is being misrepresented, that doesn't seem to square with his conclusion. I'm confused.

 

The "bad faith" argument is contained in the unilateral statement of the UK government, a statement that the EU have not contradicted. That gives it extra legal weight ... but does not mean that you can just walk away ... you would have to show "bad faith". So if the EU behaves professionally and the negotiations become protracted, the UK cannot simply walk away.

 

 

[LucysDad]

4 minutes ago, AlexRich said:

 

What I meant to say was practical improbability ... not likely to happen. And a few years after getting the WA through people will look back and wonder why this was ever an issue.

 

 

Yes, I got that  -  I agree that the practical risk was negligible...  there has to be some element of tyrust (however minimal).

 

I just want to see that reflected in the future UK/EU relationship.

[AlexRich]

5 minutes ago, dunroaming said:

Apparently some members of ERG are saying that they don't think Cox's comments necessarily kills May's deal.  Wriggle! Wriggle!

 

That's what I've been looking out for ... they are weighing the political risks and looking for a ladder to climb down from.

 

[JAG]

10 hours ago, GinBoy2 said:

Not that good on British PM's timeline. 

I couldn't even remember the name John Major until I did a google search, but I was in the right time ballpark at least.

 

I just looked it up. France which I would have thought was one of the most pro EU countries held a referendum to ratify Maastricht. It barely passed with 51% 

A couple of countries held referendums, as I recall. When the result was no, they were told to have another referendum (sounds familiar) - very European.

 

Major wouldn't have a referendum, he knew he would lose it. He "whipped" it's ratification through parliament, against the wishes of a large number of his party, and most probably against the wishes of the people of the UK. Blair and Bruin continued the motion with the subsequent Lisbon Treaty. The two most important treaties in recent years, both concerned to a very large extent with transferring sovereignty to, and in the case of the Lisbon Treaty establishing, a nascent Federal Europe; both ratified without any proper consultation with the British electorate.

 

 

Edited March 12, 2019 by JAG

[nauseus]

1 hour ago, dunroaming said:

Apparently some members of ERG are saying that they don't think Cox's comments necessarily kills May's deal.  Wriggle! Wriggle!

Funny, I didn't see that anywhere on the news.

[nauseus]

15 minutes ago, JAG said:

A couple of countries held referendums, as I recall. When the result was no, they were told to have another referendum (sounds familiar) - very European.

 

Major wouldn't have a referendum, he knew he would lose it. He "whipped" it's ratification through parliament, against the wishes of a large number of his party, and most probably against the wishes of the people of the UK. Blair and Bruin continued the motion with the subsequent Lisbon Treaty. The two most important treaties in recent years, both concerned to a very large extent with transferring sovereignty to, and in the case of the Lisbon Treaty establishing, a nascent Federal Europe; both ratified without any proper consultation with the British electorate.

 

 

Yes. Thanks. Now everyone finally knows what a fickle and devious bunch our politicians are, I think there might be a push for even more referendums. Grouse won't like to hear that ......but some of these MPs are real winkers and need guidance! 

[Grouse]

Cox sticks the pig!

[Chomper Higgot]

I wonder which side of this has Rees-Mogg’s hedge fund placed its bets?

[welovesundaysatspace]

43 minutes ago, JAG said:

A couple of countries held referendums, as I recall. When the result was no, they were told to have another referendum (sounds familiar) - very European.

Complete nonsense. Did you get that from the big book of chemtrails?

 

 

 

 

 

Edited March 12, 2019 by welovesundaysatspace

[welovesundaysatspace]

4 hours ago, Laughing Gravy said:

I suggest you read all your posts. I managed 10 minutes before I stopped as I felt depressed. Summing up from those posts, I have to say all you do is moan. In fact I was thinking that you are a 'wind up merchant' but no,  you are somoene who just likes to complain, without any conviction.

 

You are going on about the EU and how bad it is in the UK. Why not move to one of the wonderful 27 Countries. Apparently moaning is totally accepted as part of culture in some of those countries. You would love it.

I suggest you read my post again. I answered your nonsense already. 

[nong38]

Last week I said I thought the PM would be defeated on her latest efforts. I have just been watching Geoffrey Cox in the House, he is a Brexiteer, he gave a good honest display and said he thought the differences had now moved enough for the House to support the Deal, however, it does seem to have convinced enough to change their view so I would suspect the Deal is still going to be voted down, MR Corbyn had already dismissed it before it came to the House so I think we can say he is playing a different game here ( I want to have an election, I want to be PM ) rather than deal with a most important moment in Parliament. 

Cameron came back with nothing from the EU, May has come back with not enough as well. The EU does not want to give a good deal they want the UK to stay because they need the money that that entails!

It now looks likely that Mays Deal will be lost with 16 days to go before departure, The EU has said no more discussions that's it! So, it looks like this. There are a couple of MPs who want to bring a motion that the UK cannot leave without a deal after the House will have voted to reject the deal!! Where would that leave the UK? A stupid move to remove a strong card to play and offer what ( presumably a 2nd referendum or staying in the EU)?

If we get to the 29th March without any interference from people trying to interfere with leaving then the UK will leave with No Deal and go to WTO rules which according to the latest polls the public are happy to do.

Interesting times eh!

[AlexRich]

It looks like the ERG are listening to the “theme from MASH”, “suicide is painless” and will vote down May’s deal, an error of historic proportions. So tomorrow no deal gets thrown out and Parliament takes control. 

 

These clowns, who claim to want to leave the EU, by their actions, will ensure we have either the softest of Brexits or none whatsoever. Every strategic manoeuvre they get involved in is an abject failure.

 

Make sure you’ve all got plenty of popcorn in the house, and some tissues for those of a sensitive demeanour.

[welovesundaysatspace]

 

2 minutes ago, nong38 said:

If we get to the 29th March without any interference from people trying to interfere with leaving then the UK will leave with No Deal and go to WTO rules which according to the latest polls the public are happy to do.

Interesting times eh!

Like this? 

[AlexRich]

1 minute ago, welovesundaysatspace said:

 

Like this? 

The point he has failed to understand is that it is no longer in the hands of the public, and if they ever get another vote “no deal” will not be on the ballot. Parliament will “interfere” and effectively take over. 

 

 

 

 

[tebee]

The man from ERG - he say NO! - what next ?

 

 

[Rally123]

15 minutes ago, AlexRich said:

These clowns, who claim to want to leave the EU, by their actions, will ensure we have either the softest of Brexits or none whatsoever. Every strategic manoeuvre they get involved in is an abject failure.

 

[Grouse]

PMs voice going

 

Scenery falling down next 

 

Pitiable 

 

Cracking cheese, Gromit!

Edited March 12, 2019 by Grouse

[AlexRich]

5 minutes ago, Rally123 said:

 

You’ve mistaken me for a fan of Brexit. I am not, so no panic at all. I’m just pointing out the idiocy of the ERG ... they will end up with an outcome which is, from their point of view, far worse.

[7by7]

8 hours ago, Krataiboy said:

Rather than get personal,

Why do you consider it wrong to ask someone to express their own opinion?

 

8 hours ago, Krataiboy said:

how about trying this for starters (There's lots more in the same vein, just a Google away):

Actually, May's deal would be worse than no Brexit. A clean break is the cleanest solution

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2019/01/21/actually-mays-deal-would-worse-no-brexit-clean-break-cleanest/

I don't subscribe, so just get

Quote

Remain campaigners - what are you playing at? It is extremely naive to think cancelling Brexit is a simple matter of voting to do so. If anything that would be the beginning of your troubles.

It's clear that those conspiring towards a People's Vote, or to leave the EU in name only (Norway-plus, Canada-style, etc.) don't appreciate the awesome backlash they could inspire. To mangle somewhat the famous quote about Hannibal, they don't know how to win victory and they wouldn't know how to use it. When asked to explain how they would mitigate the fury cancelling Brexit would provoke, they haven't a clue. In most cases they haven't thought about it.

Consider the 2015 election, which took place a few...

 

Subscribe today for unlimited access to Premium articles

 From that little bit which is available to non subscribers, it appears the author, Daniel Jackson, is arguing against cancelling Brexit rather than May's deal. Maybe he says what he considers to be wrong about May's deal in the bit behind the pay wall.

 

You have, I assume, paid your subscription and so can quote his objections to May's deal for us; or did you just read the headline?

 

In the meantime, do you actually hold an opinion of your own on this matter?

 

 

[Basil B]

There is no way she is going to get it through...

 

He pleas are like a condemned person walking to the scaffold.

 

The real question what next?

 

The hollow threat from those Tories trying to get it through is if Teresa loses tonight then they will go for a general election, that would be like turkeys voting for xmas. 

 

[AlexRich]

2 minutes ago, Basil B said:

There is no way she is going to get it through...

 

He pleas are like a condemned person walking to the scaffold.

 

The real question what next?

 

The hollow threat from those Tories trying to get it through is if Teresa loses tonight then they will go for a general election, that would be like turkeys voting for xmas. 

 

Correct. A party as split as the Tories are will never win power. What you will end up with is a coalition government headed up by Labour ... with some help from SNP, Liberals, IG.

 

And the ERG will end up with a very soft Brexit or a deal that becomes part of a referendum ... risking no Brexit.

 

Their strategy is beyond stupid.

 

 

 

 

[Basil B]

13 minutes ago, AlexRich said:

Correct. A party as split as the Tories are will never win power. What you will end up with is a coalition government headed up by Labour ... with some help from SNP, Liberals, IG.

 

And the ERG will end up with a very soft Brexit or a deal that becomes part of a referendum ... risking no Brexit.

 

Their strategy is beyond stupid.

 

 

 

 

Could see a Labour lead coalition but without Corbyn, nobody trusts that weasel, not even many Labour MP's.

[tebee]

14 minutes ago, 7by7 said:

Why do you consider it wrong to ask someone to express their own opinion?

 

I don't subscribe, so just get

 From that little bit which is available to non subscribers, it appears the author, Daniel Jackson, is arguing against cancelling Brexit rather than May's deal. Maybe he says what he considers to be wrong about May's deal in the bit behind the pay wall.

 

You have, I assume, paid your subscription and so can quote his objections to May's deal for us; or did you just read the headline?

 

In the meantime, do you actually hold an opinion of your own on this matter?

 

 

Not a subscriber either, but I am a computer hacker at heart, so I know how to read it !

 

Basically he's saying many people feel politically homeless, so a betrayal narrative has a powerful allure. Possible rise more extreme brexit parties. failure to deliver will result in great  disappointment, inducing sect like devotion. 

 

Oddly enough he then raises the point that only by not being delivered can brexit remain true, any version of it would have flaws 

 "Brexit, if denied to those who voted for it, would retain its utopian potential, which it can only be robbed of through realisation."

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Basil B]

That it another hiding...

 

242 for  391 against

 

 

Watch this space.

 

Tomorrow MP's vote out Hard Brexit 

 

Thursday MP's vote for an extension, but for what purpose?

 

That will be the first thing the the leader of the EU27 will want to know, and probably want to see at least another referendum, If they refuse which can be likely then we have two options, withdraw Article 50 or leave by default with no deal.

Edited March 12, 2019 by Basil B

[AlexRich]

39 minutes ago, Basil B said:

That it another hiding...

 

242 for  391 against

 

 

Watch this space.

 

Tomorrow MP's vote out Hard Brexit 

 

Thursday MP's vote for an extension, but for what purpose?

 

That will be the first thing the the leader of the EU27 will want to know, and probably want to see at least another referendum, If they refuse which can be likely then we have two options, withdraw Article 50 or leave by default with no deal.

 

The EU will not refuse, they will not voluntarily engineer a no deal exit, but they might require an extension of one year, or a referendum.

 

 

 

[Laughing Gravy]

8 hours ago, welovesundaysatspace said:

I suggest you read my post again. I answered your nonsense already. 

Try reading your own posts and you will clearly see that it is moan, moan, moan. How many posters have you on the ignore lists!