MPs seek to block no-deal Brexit by stopping government funds

[Chomper Higgot]

1 hour ago, dick dasterdly said:

"Removing an empty threat doesn’t weaken a negotiation position."

 

I agree, which is why May/Ollie and the like turning 'no deal' into an "empty threat" is so despicable.

 

"The EU holds all the cards"

 

Disagree entirely.   BOTH sides will lose out in the event of no deal, and then be forced to the far less preferable (and more expensive) option of having to negotiate the various issues, individually, after the event..... 

 

Additionally, (in this scenario - no deal) the uk will have already left, so uk politicians will have fewer reasons to back down on every point.  Both sides are likely to be forced into the position of having to genuinely negotiate! ????

What’s the UK going to offer, turnips?

[Bluespunk]

On 6/28/2019 at 6:27 AM, Loiner said:

The fanaticism of these Remainers knows no bounds. For the past forty years or so they have infiltrated every aspect of public life, event to the highest levels. Will no one rid us of these meddlesome europhiles? 

Whereas johnson’s threat to suspend parliament to force through brexit is a pure democratic action. 

 

Not fanatical at all...

Edited June 29, 2019 by Bluespunk

[dick dasterdly]

41 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

What’s the UK going to offer, turnips?

Perhaps a somewhat increased 'divorce payment' (and no, this does not mean I consider the 39bn even remotely acceptable until proven) in exchange for a favourable trade agreement?

 

This would suit both sides, but has not even been considered yet.....

[stevenl]

3 minutes ago, dick dasterdly said:

Perhaps a somewhat increased 'divorce payment' (and no, this does not mean I consider the 39bn even remotely acceptable until proven) in exchange for a favourable trade agreement?

 

This would suit both sides, but has not even been considered yet.....

Where did you read this has not been considered?

[stephenterry]

4 hours ago, alant said:

Many have opinions about the effects and validity of a no deal but to rule it out seriously weakens the negotiating position. As for devaluing sterling, as members, which we are, sterling has lost rather a lot.

We don't have a negotiating position as the EU has made it clear they are not going to reopen the WAG. However, I consider that if Boris softens May's red lines there could be room for manouver, but I doubt that would happen as the ERG wouldn't vote for it. 

 

What the EU has suggested is that the 'political statement'  - following acceptance of the WAG, and into the transitional period - could be 'clarified' particularly the Irish backstop on the understanding that when new technology is available, the UK wouldn't be stuck in it forever and a day. 

 

On the other hand, the lack of time for parliament to agree any deal, could mean the rejection of a no-deal (as the only alternative) resulting in a GE.   

[dick dasterdly]

53 minutes ago, dick dasterdly said:

Perhaps a somewhat increased 'divorce payment' (and no, this does not mean I consider the 39bn even remotely acceptable until proven) in exchange for a favourable trade agreement?

 

This would suit both sides, but has not even been considered yet.....

 

49 minutes ago, stevenl said:

Where did you read this has not been considered?

By the fact that TRADE negotiations haven't even started, and aren't included in the May/eu 'agreement'?

 

Personally, I find it odd that zero (?) uk MPs have mentioned this.....

[dick dasterdly]

42 minutes ago, stephenterry said:

We don't have a negotiating position as the EU has made it clear they are not going to reopen the WAG. However, I consider that if Boris softens May's red lines there could be room for manouver, but I doubt that would happen as the ERG wouldn't vote for it. 

 

What the EU has suggested is that the 'political statement'  - following acceptance of the WAG, and into the transitional period - could be 'clarified' particularly the Irish backstop on the understanding that when new technology is available, the UK wouldn't be stuck in it forever and a day. 

 

On the other hand, the lack of time for parliament to agree any deal, could mean the rejection of a no-deal (as the only alternative) resulting in a GE.   

"We don't have a negotiating position as the EU has made it clear they are not going to reopen the WAG."

 

Excellent.  Which can possibly result in a 'no deal' exit as the eu/May 'surrender treaty' has already been rejected three times by uk politicians who are very aware that they are likely to lose their seats if accepted. ????

[dick dasterdly]

It's more than possible that I'm very wrong - but I suspect most ordinary people are concerned about a trading agreement.

 

Something that has been put to the bottom of 'the list' by both uk and eu negotiators.....

[stephenterry]

1 hour ago, dick dasterdly said:

"We don't have a negotiating position as the EU has made it clear they are not going to reopen the WAG."

 

Excellent.  Which can possibly result in a 'no deal' exit as the eu/May 'surrender treaty' has already been rejected three times by uk politicians who are very aware that they are likely to lose their seats if accepted. ????

There are really two practical solutions:-

1. Boris will aim to persuade ERG members and others to sanction the clarification of the WAG, subject to him agreeing a revised political statement with the EU during the transitional period - such as  ensuring the UK doesn't remain in the backstop forever and a day. If Tories don't want to lose their seats in parliament come a GE, they better play ball.

 

2. Boris will huff and puff and say that the only way to exit is on a no-deal. Parliament would aim to reject that, possibly causing the biggest upset in British constitutional history - resulting in the end of Johnson, dissolution of parliament, a GE and an end to the Tory party for the forseeable future.

 

Bottom line, DD, no UK parliament is going to accept a no-deal, because enough Tory MPs would put the UK before the party. That's a cert.

 

 

   

[stephenterry]

1 hour ago, dick dasterdly said:

It's more than possible that I'm very wrong - but I suspect most ordinary people are concerned about a trading agreement.

 

Something that has been put to the bottom of 'the list' by both uk and eu negotiators.....

it's more than possible most ordinary people couldn't give a toss about a trading agreement because there are more important things to worry about, like who's on the Box tonight.  

[Loiner]

Whereas johnson’s threat to suspend parliament to force through brexit is a pure democratic action. 
 
Not fanatical at all...

Just delivering the Brexit that we democratically voted for. Nothing fanatical about that, beating the subversion.

[Bluespunk]

Just now, Loiner said:

Just delivering the Brexit that we democratically voted for. Nothing fanatical about that, beating the subversion.

Suspending a democratically elected parliament to get your way is fanaticism.  

[Loiner]

Bottom line, DD, no UK parliament is going to accept a no-deal, because enough Tory MPs would put the UK before the party. That's a cert.

Shouldn’t be so sure about that because a No Deal exit IS the best for UK. Trade Deals come after that.
We’ve seen before that the party comes first and so does their jobs. With Boris as leader there will be no more Tory Remainers.

[grumpy 4680]

                   

On 6/28/2019 at 9:07 AM, Jonathan Fairfield said:

 

“The suggestion that we could or should be taken out of the EU without the consent of the House of Commons is fundamentally wrong, and frankly unconstitutional,” Grieve told The Sun.

         It would be unconstitutional if those pro brexit rebels to damage our leaving, having had the referendum to leave, any deal that leaves us tied to the EU is madness

[Loiner]

Suspending a democratically elected parliament to get your way is fanaticism.  

The same parliament that legislated to Leave without any mention of a deal. All democratically done.
Pity that the Remainers and foreigners don’t like it.

[Bluespunk]

18 minutes ago, Loiner said:

The same parliament that legislated to Leave without any mention of a deal. All democratically done.
Pity that the Remainers and foreigners don’t like it.

Yep, many U.K. citizens don’t like it. 

 

Pity the brexiteers who would deny them their rights. 

 

Pity the democracy that allows leaders elected by a minority to suspend the parliament elected by the majority to force their policies through. 

Edited June 29, 2019 by Bluespunk

[Chomper Higgot]

14 hours ago, dick dasterdly said:

 

By the fact that TRADE negotiations haven't even started, and aren't included in the May/eu 'agreement'?

 

Personally, I find it odd that zero (?) uk MPs have mentioned this.....

You are correct, but then the UK helped establish the rules governing how a nation leaves the union.

 

Trade agreements are what takes place with none members.

 

 

 

 

[Scott]

Troll post removed.  

[Chomper Higgot]

14 hours ago, dick dasterdly said:

It's more than possible that I'm very wrong - but I suspect most ordinary people are concerned about a trading agreement.

 

Something that has been put to the bottom of 'the list' by both uk and eu negotiators.....

I think if you said most ordinary people are interested in not being poorer you’d be nearer the mark.

 

A UK/EU trading agreement (you’ll recall Liam Fox referred to it as ‘easiest deal in human history’ cannot happen until the UK leaves the EU.

This has been very clearly stated by the Government and the EU.

 

For examples of EU trade agreements, refer the recent EU/Japan and very recent EU/South America agreements, each of which took decades to set up.

 

Good luck selling no-deal to people who have no wish to be worse off.

[alant]

20 hours ago, stephenterry said:

We don't have a negotiating position as the EU has made it clear they are not going to reopen the WAG

Rather demonstrates that entering the negotiations without a no Deal made our position weaker...

[dick dasterdly]

6 hours ago, Chomper Higgot said:

I think if you said most ordinary people are interested in not being poorer you’d be nearer the mark.

 

A UK/EU trading agreement (you’ll recall Liam Fox referred to it as ‘easiest deal in human history’ cannot happen until the UK leaves the EU.

This has been very clearly stated by the Government and the EU.

 

For examples of EU trade agreements, refer the recent EU/Japan and very recent EU/South America agreements, each of which took decades to set up.

 

Good luck selling no-deal to people who have no wish to be worse off.

"A UK/EU trading agreement <snip> cannot happen until the UK leaves the EU."

 

Of course it can't actually "happen" until the uk leaves the eu!

 

But it's telling that neither side has even bothered to include this most important point in the negotiations.....

Edited June 30, 2019 by dick dasterdly

[billd766]

10 hours ago, Bluespunk said:

Yep, many U.K. citizens don’t like it. 

 

Pity the brexiteers who would deny them their rights. 

 

Pity the democracy that allows leaders elected by a minority to suspend the parliament elected by the majority to force their policies through. 

 

quote from you

 

Yep, many U.K. citizens don’t like it. 

Pity the brexiteers remainers who would deny them their rights. 

[yogi100]

On 6/28/2019 at 3:08 PM, JonnyF said:

If the EU offers a sensible deal then Brexiteers would be more than happy to take it.

 

Remember that it was this mostly "Remain" Parliament that voted May's deal down, not Brexit zealots. So a Remain parliament rejects May's deal and you think that means other Remainers can withhold tax payers money from the very same tax payers that voted to leave to try to get what they want (Brexit delayed or reversed) after voting through article 50? Bizarre logic. Why not just admit you couldn't give a toss about Democratic process as long as you, the minority, get what you want.

 

 

Bang on the Nail Jonny.

 

That sums the situation up in a nutshell.

[Bluespunk]

34 minutes ago, billd766 said:

 

quote from you

 

Yep, many U.K. citizens don’t like it. 

Pity the brexiteers remainers who would deny them their rights. 

Brexit is going on.

 

No rights denied.

 

Those opposing it have every right to do so. 

 

That’s democracy. 

 

Oh, and if you modify my words, as you did, you are no longer quoting me. 

Edited June 30, 2019 by Bluespunk

[stephenterry]

12 hours ago, Loiner said:

Shouldn’t be so sure about that because a No Deal exit IS the best for UK. Trade Deals come after that.
We’ve seen before that the party comes first and so does their jobs. With Boris as leader there will be no more Tory Remainers.

I take it you have evidence to support your proclamation that No Deal exit is the best for UK. Seems to contradict parliament who has rejected it already. Just one reference from a reliable source would be sufficient. 

 

In the event of a proposed no deal, enough Tories will block it, hence a GE comes next.

[billd766]

20 minutes ago, Bluespunk said:

Brexit is going on.

 

No rights denied.

 

Those opposing it have every right to do so. 

 

That’s democracy. 

 

Oh, and if you modify my words, as you did, you are no longer quoting me. 

If you had read my post I actually quoted the whole of your post. I then modified it to suit my purpose.

 

So Brexiteers also have the right to oppose things. That is democracy too.

 

If you don't like my posts, then you know what to do about it.

[billd766]

1 minute ago, stephenterry said:

I take it you have evidence to support your proclamation that No Deal exit is the best for UK. Seems to contradict parliament who has rejected it already. Just one reference from a reliable source would be sufficient. 

 

In the event of a proposed no deal, enough Tories will block it, hence a GE comes next.

How do you KNOW the Tories will block a No Deal when it won't be brought up until after the new PM is in place and after their summer break?

 

Both prospective PMs have said that a no deal Brexit is still on the table.

[stephenterry]

1 minute ago, billd766 said:

How do you KNOW the Tories will block a No Deal when it won't be brought up until after the new PM is in place and after their summer break?

 

Both prospective PMs have said that a no deal Brexit is still on the table.

Common sense. There would be no feasible time frame to fiddle about with an amended agreement. Hence Boris would  - so he said - table a no deal and it would be rejected. He won't prorogue parliament (end the current session) as that would be political suicide.

[stephenterry]

Latest quote from Johnson, which is as ironic as it gets:-

 

He adds: 'We members of this precious Union are therefore so obviously and so irrefutably more than the sum of our parts; and that is why I am a passionate believer in the Unions – all of them – and when you look at the scale of our collective achievement, I simply cannot understand why anyone would want to mutilate this country and to break it up.

 

Which is exactly what he aims to do with leaving the EU. You really can't make it up, can you? The man's a total richard-head.

[Bluespunk]

28 minutes ago, billd766 said:

If you had read my post I actually quoted the whole of your post. I then modified it to suit my purpose.

 

So Brexiteers also have the right to oppose things. That is democracy too.

 

If you don't like my posts, then you know what to do about it.

Ah, thought you were referring to my modified words below rather than the quote box above which has my username attached.... My mistake. 

 

brexiteers can oppose whatever they like. No skin off my nose.  

 

Why do you feel I don’t like your posts? I may not agree with you on all occasions but I have no problem with your posts. 

Edited June 30, 2019 by Bluespunk