What options are left for British PM Johnson on Brexit?

[beautifulthailand99]

6 minutes ago, vogie said:

Most people would concede they don't have a point, but not you, change the discussion into mindless drivel. No point in sharing rhetoric, good bye everyone, goodbye.

Bye bye - Remainers have compromised by starting to view the deal as acceptable - we will have technically left the EU and have a lot of options to develop as we renew a new relationship with the EU in good faith. If people want needless pointless destruction then keep on batting for the No Deal - for that it what it is. I can't believe we even had a government even contemplating that madness and that people would cheer them on. Anyway I hope the actions of the Rebel Alliance have opened a new and final chapter in this nonsense. Once and for all. I am a "45bahter"

Edited September 11, 2019 by beautifulthailand99

[OneMoreFarang]

4 hours ago, JonnyF said:

3 most likely options are...

 

1. Challenge/test the law in the courts. Exit the EU while it's going through the process.

2. Let Britain veto it's own request for an extension. 

3. Convince one of the other member states to veto the request by threatening to become a menace in the European Parliament (veto everything, regularly demonstrate and ignore protocol etc.). The Brexit party can help with this.

 

Quite a few other options as well. This is far from over but the government are keeping quiet on which option they will take to avoid Parliament plotting against it. Good Luck Boris, together, the people and the government can overcome this colluding, traitorous Parliament,

 

Lets assume they leave without a deal on the 31st October.

And then?

The UK and EU will still trade with each other.

People will still travel.

So what will happen very soon? They will start to talk to each other again about trade and other agreements.

And what will be that start of those negotiations: The backstop, the payment, all those things the UK parliament can't agree on.

Same same but different. Because once the UK is out of the EU it will be a lot harder for them to work on this.

Great job Boris!

[beautifulthailand99]

5 minutes ago, AlexRich said:

Now that Boris Johnson doesn’t have to dance to “Come on Arlene” the obvious choice is to isolate the backstop to NI, use the political declaration time period to work on credible “alternative arrangements” and then move on with his domestic agenda, which, as much as I dislike him, looks like a vote winner and a much better alternative to Corbyn. He also needs to reinstate the whip to the rebels. 

 

It’s obvious what he needs to do. The last thing he wants is to be the shortest reigning prime minister in history. 

Maybe his shotgun approach has focused all our minds at last.

Edited September 11, 2019 by beautifulthailand99

[AlexRich]

Just now, transam said:

Winston Churchill didn't last that long but he got the job done..

If by “got the job done” you mean a no deal outcome then you are likely to be disappointed. And in the unlikely event that did happen it would only cause more chaos in the UK for many years to come ... the only sensible way out is a deal of some sort.

[Peter Denis]

As a European I truly regret if a no-deal Brexit would take place. 

Europe needs the priceless British sense of humour!

 

Edited September 11, 2019 by Peter Denis

[sirineou]

As an outsider I watch in disbelief. One Union is good, but another union is not good.

How about if you guys left the EU and then the EU, and perhaps some other white countries   joined the UK?

would that make you happy?

You can call it the Association of White International People, 

ASS.W.I.PE for short.

 

Edited September 11, 2019 by sirineou

[welovesundaysatspace]

18 minutes ago, vogie said:

Most people would concede they don't have a point, but not you, change the discussion into mindless drivel. No point in sharing rhetoric, good bye everyone, goodbye.

You can’t seriously claim that MPs didn’t vote in the referendum, or that their votes somehow don’t count. Even for a Brexiteer that would be too much lack of knowledge. 

[stevenl]

13 minutes ago, transam said:

Winston Churchill didn't last that long but he got the job done..

He wanted a united Europe, but maybe the UK is going to spoil his wish.

[keithsimmonds]

30 minutes ago, david555 said:

SSSTTTT....!!  I don't think …..I know ….(but not wishing to depressing leavers , so say  "I think" )

You would only depress me if you lived next door to me !!!

[transam]

7 minutes ago, sirineou said:

As an outsider I watch in disbelief. One Union is good, but another union is not good.

How about if you guys left the EU and then the EU, and perhaps some other white countries   joined the UK?

would that make you happy?

You can call it the Association of White International People, 

ASS.W.I.PE for short.

 

Try a few large Changs.....????

[sirineou]

Just now, transam said:

Try a few large Changs.....????

What do you think made me write this? 

[transam]

5 minutes ago, sirineou said:

What do you think made me write this? 

I have no idea....A few bottles of Chang...?  ????

[tebee]

54 minutes ago, vogie said:

I would love know to what you base your evidence on, when the only two options on the ballot paper was remain or leave, the electorate either voted leave or remain which wouldn't give you any indication of what they were thinking at the time of placing their cross, so by saying nobody voted for a no-deal is purely imaginary.

There are a good number of leave voters who don't want no deal. There is not, and never has been any sort of majority for no deal. Trying to tell people now that is what they voted for is  the old bait and switch con.

 

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-49551893?

 

[alan grice]

Funny lot Brits , you have a vote to leave, some chump says it too small majority to leave, then calls for a new vote that would be still a small win if at all.Democracy rendered totally useless imo.!


Sent from my iPhone using Thaivisa Connect

[sirineou]

27 minutes ago, transam said:

I have no idea....A few bottles of Chang...?  ????

Well, mostly diminished mental capacity, The changs seem to help, but not a lot.

Note to self must remember to take my medication

Ok Back to Brexit, very entertaining IMO , makes me forget about the Donald and our problems. Talk about our ASSociation of WhIte PEople 

Edited September 11, 2019 by sirineou

[vogie]

15 minutes ago, tebee said:

There are a good number of leave voters who don't want no deal. There is not, and never has been any sort of majority for no deal. Trying to tell people now that is what they voted for is  the old bait and switch con.

 

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-49551893?

 

There are not many leave voters who are againgst a no deal, why do you say there are, according to your link 73% are in agreement to a no deal as opposed to 14% who are againgst, pretty convincing in anybody eyes.

[Rookiescot]

https://whatukthinks.org/eu/questions/if-there-was-a-referendum-on-britains-membership-of-the-eu-how-would-you-vote-2/

 

 

[Marc K]

As an outsider, I find the BRexit drama to be totally entertaining -- best soap opera ever on the BBC! even beats Downton Abbey -- but also vastly troubling. We are going to witness the current world order to crumble into chaos and division? I watched through most of a life time as countries pleaded to JOIN the EU! Now, one risks Good Friday troubles, a collapsing currency market, an impotent Parliament -- all taken together likely a reduction in the British standard of living! -- in order to proclaim one's uniqueness and right to go-it-alone?? Makes absolutely no sense to me, sorry.

 

IMHO the basic problem of Britain at the moment is it wants the benefits of togetherness without its obligations. Ain't gonna work, BoJo. Ain't gonna work. You can't have your cake and to eat it too. Nope. No one is going to agree to that, ever.

 

So good luck and I will be tuning into the next episodes in the days/weeks to come. Let's see if saner forces somehow manage to prevail in the end.

[MartinKal]

6 hours ago, david555 said:

just put a border in the Irish sea ….just same as with any oversea U.K. territory …. same same ….and the backstop is solved !….. Up to the next hot dispute as there are more to solve ,besides no need of DUP to save majority ...as is scattered to pieces anyway ….one trouble party less...!!

Dont even need to do that as the UK has said it will not have any hardware at the Ireland N S frontier and Eire has said the same thing.

 

The irony is that neither the UK nor Eire want a wall, but as neither will accept the other's terms, both will get the wall. 

 

The argument is that the EU cannot accept a hole in its boundary and the UK cannot accept a wall in its boundary. But the reality is that neither side will lay the first brick.

 

A free trade agreement solves nothing. If the UK wants to negotiate FTAs with other trade blocks, there must be a wall to stop goods being imported into a (say) 0-tariff UK then being exported over the wall-less border (ie smuggled...noone to stop them) into high-tariff fortress Europe. So must have a wall.

 

No wall, on the other hand, requires full alignment with EU rules on the Single Market and Customs Union (smuggling would be pointless). So no point in leaving as the UK is still effectively "in", while having no say in those rules as it is "out".

 

(Smuggling is one issue, but really we are talking about compliance with EU tarrifs and standards and exceptions being handled by the ECJ European Court of Justice so UK being gradually stripped of its sovereignty.)

 

If you've followed this argument so far, you are a better (wo)man than 75% of the people sitting on the little green benches of parliament.

 

So ... conclusion! What can be done?

 

The UK can only be "in" or "out". There is no half way in or half-way out. The UK can trade through and with the EU, as a full member; or it cannot trade at all with the EU and will make its way on the high seas on its own.

 

Never mind the political moves described in this article, reality will eventually intrude : fully in, or fully out.

 

Now that things are clear, it is certainly not for either parliament or the government to decide; and even more certainly not for the EU.

 

Which leaves only the people in a referendum. Fully in, or fully out? Which?

 

Edited September 11, 2019 by MartinKal

[JonnyF]

2 minutes ago, Marc K said:

MHO the basic problem of Britain at the moment is it wants the benefits of togetherness without its obligations. Ain't gonna work, BoJo. Ain't gonna work. You can't have your cake and to eat it too. Nope. No one is going to agree to that, ever.

This is a fallacy, a Remainer strawman argument to try and make Leavers look uninformed or unreasonable.

 

Every Leaver I have spoken to knows very well that there are both downsides and upsides to Brexit. They know there will be a period of disruption. They still want to Leave. More than ever.

[Laughing Gravy]

6 hours ago, tebee said:

"The people have spoken and should never be allowed to speak again "

Yes they have. A reminder in history as it seems you have forgotten which seems to be a remainer trait. It took 43 years to get a referendum after joining the EEC. Forget about the lies of the referendum in 2016. There were loads of lies in 1973.

 

So this referendum result of 2016 hasn't even been enacted upon. So do you see how ridiculous the statement you have said is.

Edited September 11, 2019 by Laughing Gravy

[david555]

9 minutes ago, MartinKal said:

Dont even need to do that as the UK has said it will not have any hardware at the Ireland N S frontier and Eire has said the same thing.

 

The irony is that neither the UK nor Eire want a wall, but as neither will accept the other's terms, both will get the wall. 

 

The argument is that the EU cannot accept a hole in its boundary and the UK cannot accept a wall in its boundary. But the reality is that neither side will lay the first brick.

 

A free trade agreement solves nothing. If the UK wants to negotiate FTAs with other trade blocks, there must be a wall to stop goods being imported into a (say) 0-tariff UK then being exported over the border into high-tariff foryress Europe.

 

Yet no wall would mean full alignment with EU rules on the Single Market and Customs Union. So no point in leaving as the UK is still effectively "in", while having no say in those rules as it is "out".

 

If youve followed this argument so far, you are a better (wo)man 75% of the people sitting on the little green benches of parliament.

 

So ... conclusion! What can be done?

 

The UK can only be "in" or "out". There is no half way in and out. The UK can trade through and with the EU, as a full member; or it cannot trade at all and will make its way on the high seas on its own.

 

Now that things are clear, it is certainly not for either parliament or the government to decide; and even more certainly not the the EU.

 

Which leaves only the people in a referendum. Fully in, or fully out? Which?

 

So U.K. brexit was about taking control over their borders …… with no borders? , all E.U "overflow African immigrants" would like to have a passage way to paradise island just taking ferry to Ireland and so further on to N.I. and finally Paradise island , no borders …...lol

 

But ….maybe no need of Irish borders ...if the Irish people go for unification ….

Edited September 11, 2019 by david555

[beautifulthailand99]

Keep up the good work Nigel and you BP nutters - latest poll. Our latest voting intention for 
@Telegraph
https://www.comresglobal.com/polls/the-daily-telegraph-westminster-voting-intention-september-2019/

 

 

Edited September 11, 2019 by beautifulthailand99

[transam]

6 minutes ago, MartinKal said:

Dont even need to do that as the UK has said it will not have any hardware at the Ireland N S frontier and Eire has said the same thing.

 

The irony is that neither the UK nor Eire want a wall, but as neither will accept the other's terms, both will get the wall. 

 

The argument is that the EU cannot accept a hole in its boundary and the UK cannot accept a wall in its boundary. But the reality is that neither side will lay the first brick.

 

A free trade agreement solves nothing. If the UK wants to negotiate FTAs with other trade blocks, there must be a wall to stop goods being imported into a (say) 0-tariff UK then being exported over the border into high-tariff foryress Europe.

 

Yet no wall would mean full alignment with EU rules on the Single Market and Customs Union. So no point in leaving as the UK is still effectively "in", while having no say in those rules as it is "out".

 

If youve followed this argument so far, you are a better (wo)man 75% of the people sitting on the little green benches of parliament.

 

So ... conclusion! What can be done?

 

The UK can only be "in" or "out". There is no half way in and out. The UK can trade through and with the EU, as a full member; or it cannot trade at all and will make its way on the high seas on its own.

 

Now that things are clear, it is certainly not for either parliament or the government to decide; and even more certainly not the the EU.

 

Which leaves only the people in a referendum. Fully in, or fully out? Which?

 

We have already voted chum.....

[Jip99]

1 minute ago, transam said:

We have already voted chum.....

 

 

More than once.......

 

I recall that in the last general election both the Tories and Labour campaigned for votes on the basis of delivering Brexit.

[Forethat]

4 minutes ago, Marc K said:

IMHO the basic problem of Britain at the moment is it wants the benefits of togetherness without its obligations. Ain't gonna work, BoJo. Ain't gonna work. You can't have your cake and to eat it too. Nope. No one is going to agree to that, ever.

I think you're completely wrong. I think a majority of leave-supporters (or "Hard Brexiters", as they're called on here) are perfectly OK with a majority of the obligations. What they are NOT ok with are the leaps towards a Federated Nations of Europe. Free trade and free movement doesn't require a centralised state. Free movement of capital and currencies doesn't require a centralised state. I could go on like this for while, but you get the idea. I hope.

 

[bristolboy]

1 minute ago, Forethat said:

I think you're completely wrong. I think a majority of leave-supporters (or "Hard Brexiters", as they're called on here) are perfectly OK with a majority of the obligations. What they are NOT ok with are the leaps towards a Federated Nations of Europe. Free trade and free movement doesn't require a centralised state. Free movement of capital and currencies doesn't require a centralised state. I could go on like this for while, but you get the idea. I hope.

 

Cameron actually secured an agreement from the EU that the UK would not be committed to being part of "ever closer union."

“It is recognised that the United Kingdom, in the light of the specific situation it has under the treaties, is not committed to further political integration into the European Union.” 

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/05/19/eu-deal-what-david-cameron-asked-for-and-what-he-actually-got/

[joecoolfrog]

6 hours ago, tebee said:

"The people have spoken and should never be allowed to speak again "

Unless you are Farage obviously

[simple1]

1 hour ago, vogie said:

There are not many leave voters who are againgst a no deal, why do you say there are, according to your link 73% are in agreement to a no deal as opposed to 14% who are againgst, pretty convincing in anybody eyes.

Latest polls identify majority oppose a No Deal Brexit...

 

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-49551893

Edited September 11, 2019 by simple1

[RuamRudy]

Sorry, cannot link as on my phone, but prorogation ruled unlawful.

Sent from my SM-G975F using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app