Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » BACK TO THE FUTURE – Part 2 The past is a foreign country – Re

124

Comments

  • notme said:

    notme said:

    Scott_P said:

    Small businesses negotiate good terms with bigger businesses all the time. Size isn't everything.

    True.

    We negotiated the best deal with the EU anyone got ever.

    And the Brexiteers torched it.
    A deal so awful that we had to negotiate a rebate mechanism. Even with that rebate mechanism we have been the second largest contributor for most of our period of membership despite been much poorer than many of the other member states. Even now, with the rebate we are not even close to getting more out than we put in. The EU has lost its little piggy bank.
    You seem to be having a fact bypass there @notme. On what basis was the UK (5th largest GDP in the world) "poorer than many of the other member states"?
    I was talking in a historical context, before we went through the economic liberalism of the mid 80s and early 90s.
    Even there I am afraid it simply isn't true. When we joined the EU we were the 5th largest economy in the world. We dipped down to 7th at one point but are now 5th or 6th again. The only countries in the EU that have ever been richer than us are Germany (consistently) and occasionally France. I think Italy might have snuck ahead of us once but I would have to go and check.

    That is a very long way from being poorer than many members states.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 73,330

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    kle4 said:

    Scott_P said:
    Who cares about May?! Why are people only seeming to care about this issue based on if it causes May to go or not?! Brexit is more important, the question should be how we get to a resolution, and if that happens to lead to May staying or leaving so be it.
    We get to a resolution by having a PM who can get us to a resolution. That isn't May.
    There is no resolution beyond the Deal May agreed other than No Deal or Remain/BINO.
    Yes there is.

    If you believe there's no possible other negotiations because the other side have said so then you're the most gullible person on earth and I have a bridge to sell to you.
    You persist in your unicorn fantasies then while the rest of us live in the real world, this is the only Deal on offer and the backstop is inescapable, it is this Deal, No Deal or no Brexit at all
    Tell us, what's your background in international negotiations? Because you speak with such certainty, I'd REALLY love to see your CV...
    What has that got to do with anything? When we are negotiating with a market almost 10 times our size we are not going to be able to dictate terms to them however brilliant the CV of the negotiator
    Bilge. I've completed plenty of satisfactory deals with megacorps that had a market cap 500 or 1,000 times larger than mine.
    I notice you use the word 'satisfactory' there not 'great' or 'perfect' ie much like May's Deal then
    My "satisfactory" deals are ones that use the metric of getting approved by the Board/shareholders.

    May's Deal? Not so much.....
    Well according to YouGov voters prefer May's Deal to No Deal 65% to 35% and I have no problem with EUref2 on it
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 26,764

    kle4 said:

    kle4 said:

    Scott_P said:

    A decent Brexit was possible.

    It really wasn't.

    Until Leavers come to terms with that we are screwed
    Leavers on their own could not pass a deal.

    And blame can wait until we find out if we are getting no deal or a deal or whatever. Whining about blame when we are in the middle and we don't know how much blame is necessary to apportion out is yet another distraction.
    Leavers on their own are content with the default (no deal) more than Remainers are. If we reached a leave-based deal Remainers could either get on board or cause a no deal.
    We have reached a leave based deal, too many are just unhappy about the specifics. And if most leavers are happy with no deal fine, but when parliament finds a route to remain instead of that I hope those that are happy with no deal don't whinge, since they insisted on all or nothing.
    There will be many aspects of Brexit that will be looked at with amazement and disbelief by future generations but the story of how Brexit was lost because it's proponents could not agree on how to leave will surely attract the most attention. They took a once in a lifetime, never to be repeated, opportunity of enacting something they had spent years dreaming about and causally threw it away.
    A little of that time spent dreaming and whinging might have been spent thinking and planning.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 54,710

    kle4 said:

    kle4 said:

    glw said:

    kle4 said:

    That is your opinion, and I hope you are right, but it is merely an assertion. You seem to believe that the UK has, because of its politics, not stood firm and suffered as a result, yet find it inconceivable that the EU, because of its politics, might stand too firm and suffer as a result.

    All along there's been a strand of Brexiteer thought that secretly the EU's not really committed to the things for which it claims to stand. I do not share this view at all, it's a big part of why I want us to leave, because I take the whole "ever closer union" seriously. I'm sure the EU as an institution doesn't want to harm the UK, or Ireland indirectly, but I don't think we will be able to extract some sort of perfect Brexit by threats. They'll let us pull the trigger if we insist.

    Not least because ultimately they believe we would be hurt more than them by doing such a thing. Given we are clear that we are willing to take some pain for the sake of a principle, why would we think the EU would be unwilling to take less pain (as they believe) for a principle?
    Actually I don't believe the Irish think that which is why they are so desperate to avoid us leaving properly. If they thought us leaving properly made no difference to them they wouldn't be trying to prevent it.
    The Irish may have encouraged the EU down a path it will find it hard to back down from. They might ensure no deal.
    Why? Why could or would the EU continue down the path if the Irish stare into the abyss and blink? This is only being done in their name.
    I don't know what you find hard to grasp about this scenario. It's as you say 'if' they blink. I hope they do. You expect they will. But people don't always blink. The EU think we would be insane not to blink, yet you insist with the right leader we will not blink. You think it would be insane for the Irish (and therefore the EU) not to blink. Maybe it would be insane. But people and nations do stupid things when politics are involved. Tsipras called an actual referendum to give himself the popular support not to blink in negotiations, and succeeded, and then he still blinked, but another leader could have used that political backing to not blink no matter how stupid it might have been. The Irish and EU might know not blinking is stupid and still not do it. Why you find the idea the Irish and EU might not be rational when you regard their demands up to now and our concessions to them irrational I have no idea, clearly you accept people make bad choices, why can you not accept the Irish could make a bad choice?
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 26,764

    notme said:

    notme said:

    Scott_P said:

    Small businesses negotiate good terms with bigger businesses all the time. Size isn't everything.

    True.

    We negotiated the best deal with the EU anyone got ever.

    And the Brexiteers torched it.
    A deal so awful that we had to negotiate a rebate mechanism. Even with that rebate mechanism we have been the second largest contributor for most of our period of membership despite been much poorer than many of the other member states. Even now, with the rebate we are not even close to getting more out than we put in. The EU has lost its little piggy bank.
    You seem to be having a fact bypass there @notme. On what basis was the UK (5th largest GDP in the world) "poorer than many of the other member states"?
    I was talking in a historical context, before we went through the economic liberalism of the mid 80s and early 90s.
    Even there I am afraid it simply isn't true. When we joined the EU we were the 5th largest economy in the world. We dipped down to 7th at one point but are now 5th or 6th again. The only countries in the EU that have ever been richer than us are Germany (consistently) and occasionally France. I think Italy might have snuck ahead of us once but I would have to go and check.

    That is a very long way from being poorer than many members states.
    It was known in Italy as the sorpasso
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 26,764
    FF43 said:

    She will win against No Deal. Which is a good reason to go for that option from her PoV. Whether she can get it through parliament is another question.
    A QTWTAIN
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 54,710
    Scott_P said:
    Oh please gods let it not be Boris. We need to negotiate but we're told we need a true believer right? How exactly does Boris meet that criteria?
  • The Irish saying they will block any deal that doesn't guarantee there'll never be no deal is the ultimate equivalent to a child saying "I'm going to hold my breath until you give me what I want".

    May is currently the overindulging grownup giving in rather than calling a stop to it.
  • Foxy said:

    HYUFD said:

    85% of Irish freight traffic goes to Britain.

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-44657460

    No most of it goes through Britain not to Britain at most and that is already regulated by separate international freight laws
    Not if there's chaos at the borders. If Brexit means goods struggle to get through the ports then that affects 85% of Irish freight export.

    Which is why the Irish are desperate to avoid no deal.
    Ah the Priti Patel approach.

    How could that possibly damage our reputation in the world?
    Patel was seeking to weaponize the Irish position. Philip is just pointing out an inevitable consequence of clogged ports (if that happens). Unless of course you think we should prioritise Irish goods over our own?
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 13,208

    notme said:

    notme said:

    Scott_P said:

    Small businesses negotiate good terms with bigger businesses all the time. Size isn't everything.

    True.

    We negotiated the best deal with the EU anyone got ever.

    And the Brexiteers torched it.
    A deal so awful that we had to negotiate a rebate mechanism. Even with that rebate mechanism we have been the second largest contributor for most of our period of membership despite been much poorer than many of the other member states. Even now, with the rebate we are not even close to getting more out than we put in. The EU has lost its little piggy bank.
    You seem to be having a fact bypass there @notme. On what basis was the UK (5th largest GDP in the world) "poorer than many of the other member states"?
    I was talking in a historical context, before we went through the economic liberalism of the mid 80s and early 90s.
    Even there I am afraid it simply isn't true. When we joined the EU we were the 5th largest economy in the world. We dipped down to 7th at one point but are now 5th or 6th again. The only countries in the EU that have ever been richer than us are Germany (consistently) and occasionally France. I think Italy might have snuck ahead of us once but I would have to go and check.

    That is a very long way from being poorer than many members states.
    Indeed. And our net contribution is way below that of Germany and France and just above that of Italy.

    But tbh, I don't think @notme is much concerned with pesky facts.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 73,330

    HYUFD said:

    kle4 said:

    kle4 said:

    glw said:

    kle4 said:

    That is your opinion, and I hope you are right, but it is merely an assertion. You seem to believe that the UK has, because of its politics, not stood firm and suffered as a result, yet find it inconceivable that the EU, because of its politics, might stand too firm and suffer as a result.

    All along there's been a strand of Brexiteer thought that secretly the EU's not really committed to the things for which it claims to stand. I do not share this view at all, it's a big part of why I want us to leave, because I take the whole "ever closer union" seriously. I'm sure the EU as an institution doesn't want to harm the UK, or Ireland indirectly, but I don't think we will be able to extract some sort of perfect Brexit by threats. They'll let us pull the trigger if we insist.

    Not least because ultimately they believe we would be hurt more than them by doing such a thing. Given we are clear that we are willing to take some pain for the sake of a principle, why would we think the EU would be unwilling to take less pain (as they believe) for a principle?
    Actually I don't believe the Irish think that which is why they are so desperate to avoid us leaving properly. If they thought us leaving properly made no difference to them they wouldn't be trying to prevent it.
    The Irish may have encouraged the EU down a path it will find it hard to back down from. They might ensure no deal.
    They have not, they have offered a Deal, just hardline Brexiteers oppose it but most of the country prefers the Deal to No Deal in the polls
    You really love your polls don't you?

    That 10% Remain lead and 20% TM lead really played out so well. When will you learn polls are polls not reality?
    Theresa May won and at they were plenty of polls with Leave ahead in the final month promising 'the easiest Deal in history.' As I have said though I would be happy with a second referendum including the Deal and No Deal
  • IanB2 said:

    notme said:

    notme said:

    Scott_P said:

    Small businesses negotiate good terms with bigger businesses all the time. Size isn't everything.

    True.

    We negotiated the best deal with the EU anyone got ever.

    And the Brexiteers torched it.
    A deal so awful that we had to negotiate a rebate mechanism. Even with that rebate mechanism we have been the second largest contributor for most of our period of membership despite been much poorer than many of the other member states. Even now, with the rebate we are not even close to getting more out than we put in. The EU has lost its little piggy bank.
    You seem to be having a fact bypass there @notme. On what basis was the UK (5th largest GDP in the world) "poorer than many of the other member states"?
    I was talking in a historical context, before we went through the economic liberalism of the mid 80s and early 90s.
    Even there I am afraid it simply isn't true. When we joined the EU we were the 5th largest economy in the world. We dipped down to 7th at one point but are now 5th or 6th again. The only countries in the EU that have ever been richer than us are Germany (consistently) and occasionally France. I think Italy might have snuck ahead of us once but I would have to go and check.

    That is a very long way from being poorer than many members states.
    It was known in Italy as the sorpasso
    Cheers. Trust the Italians to have a cool word for something so mundane as GDP rankings :-)
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 33,083
    kle4 said:

    Scott_P said:
    Oh please gods let it not be Boris. We need to negotiate but we're told we need a true believer right? How exactly does Boris meet that criteria?
    Boris's column tonight is the same thing he's been writing for months about how we just need to dump the backstop and withhold the money and suddenly a Canada-style agreement will solve everything.

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2018/12/09/must-take-brussels-steel-unity-pms-deal-voted/
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 13,208
    Scott_P said:
    My god - investigative journalism of the highest order at The Times. Why did no one else consider that might be a possibility?
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 54,710

    kle4 said:

    Depends if it is an opening gambit - to keep her own troops at bay (an impossibility I think, but for the sake of argument) she cannot very well suggest deal vs remain, so throw red meat to the Rees-Moggs by suggesting only some variety of leave is possible at least.
    Why make an opening gambit you cannot deliver?
    Because Plan B is to be made to the whole House isn't? So assuming she is not already ousted it would be about demonstrating to her ranks that she will fight the good fight now, not outcome. No it doesn't make total sense, but neither do what people demand of her - they lack a majority as enough remainer tories or ERG tories mean even with the DUP on side passing anything Brexit related relies on Labour votes. So to deliver anything she needs to await a Labour reaction, which will probably be - ok to the referendum, but it must also include remain.

    And then we're back where we are. I wasn't anticipating such a plan B would be effective.
  • kle4 said:

    Why? Why could or would the EU continue down the path if the Irish stare into the abyss and blink? This is only being done in their name.

    I don't know what you find hard to grasp about this scenario. It's as you say 'if' they blink. I hope they do. You expect they will. But people don't always blink. The EU think we would be insane not to blink, yet you insist with the right leader we will not blink. You think it would be insane for the Irish (and therefore the EU) not to blink. Maybe it would be insane. But people and nations do stupid things when politics are involved. Tsipras called an actual referendum to give himself the popular support not to blink in negotiations, and succeeded, and then he still blinked, but another leader could have used that political backing to not blink no matter how stupid it might have been. The Irish and EU might know not blinking is stupid and still not do it. Why you find the idea the Irish and EU might not be rational when you regard their demands up to now and our concessions to them irrational I have no idea, clearly you accept people make bad choices, why can you not accept the Irish could make a bad choice?
    They could make a bad choice. In which case my "backstop" is to go through with no deal and face the consequences. They won't be pretty but they won't be as bad as imagined and the bluff of a hard border will be called. Either the Irish don't build a hard border in which case future trade talks aren't held to ransom by it anymore, or they do in which case both sides will be under immense pressure to come to an acceptable arrangement quickly. Either way its not the end of the story.
  • notme said:

    notme said:

    Scott_P said:

    Small businesses negotiate good terms with bigger businesses all the time. Size isn't everything.

    True.

    We negotiated the best deal with the EU anyone got ever.

    And the Brexiteers torched it.
    A deal so awful that we had to negotiate a rebate mechanism. Even with that rebate mechanism we have been the second largest contributor for most of our period of membership despite been much poorer than many of the other member states. Even now, with the rebate we are not even close to getting more out than we put in. The EU has lost its little piggy bank.
    You seem to be having a fact bypass there @notme. On what basis was the UK (5th largest GDP in the world) "poorer than many of the other member states"?
    I was talking in a historical context, before we went through the economic liberalism of the mid 80s and early 90s.
    Even there I am afraid it simply isn't true. When we joined the EU we were the 5th largest economy in the world. We dipped down to 7th at one point but are now 5th or 6th again. The only countries in the EU that have ever been richer than us are Germany (consistently) and occasionally France. I think Italy might have snuck ahead of us once but I would have to go and check.

    That is a very long way from being poorer than many members states.
    Per capita it has been true though hasn't it?
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 33,083
    May has spoken with Tusk and Varadkar tonight.

  • kle4kle4 Posts: 54,710

    kle4 said:

    Why? Why could or would the EU continue down the path if the Irish stare into the abyss and blink? This is only being done in their name.

    I don't know what you find hard to grasp about this scenario. It's as you say 'if' they blink. I hope they do. You expect they will. But people don't always blink. The EU think we would be insane not to blink, yet you insist with the right leader we will not blink. You think it would be insane for the Irish (and therefore the EU) not to blink. Maybe it would be insane. But people and nations do stupid things when politics are involved. Tsipras called an actual referendum to give himself the popular support not to blink in negotiations, and succeeded, and then he still blinked, but another leader could have used that political backing to not blink no matter how stupid it might have been. The Irish and EU might know not blinking is stupid and still not do it. Why you find the idea the Irish and EU might not be rational when you regard their demands up to now and our concessions to them irrational I have no idea, clearly you accept people make bad choices, why can you not accept the Irish could make a bad choice?
    They could make a bad choice. In which case my "backstop" is to go through with no deal and face the consequences. They won't be pretty but they won't be as bad as imagined and the bluff of a hard border will be called. Either the Irish don't build a hard border in which case future trade talks aren't held to ransom by it anymore, or they do in which case both sides will be under immense pressure to come to an acceptable arrangement quickly. Either way its not the end of the story.
    Right, but you seemed to be baffled at the idea they would not play ball. It's good you at least are prepared for potential failure of the negotiation. But it is why your assertion that all we need is a leaver PM and to be firm and it will work out is not true. We can all just hope it will be, and you think it likely.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 26,764

    IanB2 said:

    notme said:

    notme said:

    Scott_P said:

    Small businesses negotiate good terms with bigger businesses all the time. Size isn't everything.

    True.

    We negotiated the best deal with the EU anyone got ever.

    And the Brexiteers torched it.
    A deal so awful that we had to negotiate a rebate mechanism. Even with that rebate mechanism we have been the second largest contributor for most of our period of membership despite been much poorer than many of the other member states. Even now, with the rebate we are not even close to getting more out than we put in. The EU has lost its little piggy bank.
    You seem to be having a fact bypass there @notme. On what basis was the UK (5th largest GDP in the world) "poorer than many of the other member states"?
    I was talking in a historical context, before we went through the economic liberalism of the mid 80s and early 90s.
    Even there I am afraid it simply isn't true. When we joined the EU we were the 5th largest economy in the world. We dipped down to 7th at one point but are now 5th or 6th again. The only countries in the EU that have ever been richer than us are Germany (consistently) and occasionally France. I think Italy might have snuck ahead of us once but I would have to go and check.

    That is a very long way from being poorer than many members states.
    It was known in Italy as the sorpasso
    Cheers. Trust the Italians to have a cool word for something so mundane as GDP rankings :-)
    They were very chuffed about it. Possibly not so much nowadays. Although the sinking £ shrinks our economy at the same time.
  • kle4 said:

    kle4 said:

    Depends if it is an opening gambit - to keep her own troops at bay (an impossibility I think, but for the sake of argument) she cannot very well suggest deal vs remain, so throw red meat to the Rees-Moggs by suggesting only some variety of leave is possible at least.
    Why make an opening gambit you cannot deliver?
    Because Plan B is to be made to the whole House isn't? So assuming she is not already ousted it would be about demonstrating to her ranks that she will fight the good fight now, not outcome. No it doesn't make total sense, but neither do what people demand of her - they lack a majority as enough remainer tories or ERG tories mean even with the DUP on side passing anything Brexit related relies on Labour votes. So to deliver anything she needs to await a Labour reaction, which will probably be - ok to the referendum, but it must also include remain.

    And then we're back where we are. I wasn't anticipating such a plan B would be effective.
    Not exactly.

    If (and as we've discussed it is an if) a Leaver takes over and gets May's deal amended to remove the backstop then that could pass Parliament easily. Remainers aren't going to vote down this deal because its missing a backstop and leave a Leave PM facing no deal.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 34,577

    May has spoken with Tusk and Varadkar tonight.

    And the Tory Party screams "Why the fuck not, Theresa?"
  • kle4 said:

    kle4 said:

    Why? Why could or would the EU continue down the path if the Irish stare into the abyss and blink? This is only being done in their name.

    I don't know what you find hard to grasp about this scenario. It's as you say 'if' they blink. I hope they do. You expect they will. But people don't always blink. The EU think we would be insane not to blink, yet you insist with the right leader we will not blink. You think it would be insane for the Irish (and therefore the EU) not to blink. Maybe it would be insane. But people and nations do stupid things when politics are involved. Tsipras called an actual referendum to give himself the popular support not to blink in negotiations, and succeeded, and then he still blinked, but another leader could have used that political backing to not blink no matter how stupid it might have been. The Irish and EU might know not blinking is stupid and still not do it. Why you find the idea the Irish and EU might not be rational when you regard their demands up to now and our concessions to them irrational I have no idea, clearly you accept people make bad choices, why can you not accept the Irish could make a bad choice?
    They could make a bad choice. In which case my "backstop" is to go through with no deal and face the consequences. They won't be pretty but they won't be as bad as imagined and the bluff of a hard border will be called. Either the Irish don't build a hard border in which case future trade talks aren't held to ransom by it anymore, or they do in which case both sides will be under immense pressure to come to an acceptable arrangement quickly. Either way its not the end of the story.
    Right, but you seemed to be baffled at the idea they would not play ball. It's good you at least are prepared for potential failure of the negotiation. But it is why your assertion that all we need is a leaver PM and to be firm and it will work out is not true. We can all just hope it will be, and you think it likely.
    Yes that's right. And its a risk I'm prepared to take.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 26,764

    notme said:

    notme said:

    Scott_P said:

    Small businesses negotiate good terms with bigger businesses all the time. Size isn't everything.

    True.

    We negotiated the best deal with the EU anyone got ever.

    And the Brexiteers torched it.
    A deal so awful that we had to negotiate a rebate mechanism. Even with that rebate mechanism we have been the second largest contributor for most of our period of membership despite been much poorer than many of the other member states. Even now, with the rebate we are not even close to getting more out than we put in. The EU has lost its little piggy bank.
    You seem to be having a fact bypass there @notme. On what basis was the UK (5th largest GDP in the world) "poorer than many of the other member states"?
    I was talking in a historical context, before we went through the economic liberalism of the mid 80s and early 90s.
    Even there I am afraid it simply isn't true. When we joined the EU we were the 5th largest economy in the world. We dipped down to 7th at one point but are now 5th or 6th again. The only countries in the EU that have ever been richer than us are Germany (consistently) and occasionally France. I think Italy might have snuck ahead of us once but I would have to go and check.

    That is a very long way from being poorer than many members states.
    Indeed. And our net contribution is way below that of Germany and France and just above that of Italy.

    But tbh, I don't think @notme is much concerned with pesky facts.
    And it isn't him anyway...
  • May has spoken with Tusk and Varadkar tonight.

    And the Tory Party screams "Why the fuck not, Theresa?"
    I think most of the nation that pays attention must be thinking the same.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 73,330

    May has spoken with Tusk and Varadkar tonight.

    And the Tory Party screams "Why the fuck not, Theresa?"
    Actually 41% of Tories back the Deal with YouGov, 39% No Deal and 19% Remain and I thought you were no longer a Tory anyway?
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 7,167

    kle4 said:

    Scott_P said:
    Oh please gods let it not be Boris. We need to negotiate but we're told we need a true believer right? How exactly does Boris meet that criteria?
    Boris's column tonight is the same thing he's been writing for months about how we just need to dump the backstop and withhold the money and suddenly a Canada-style agreement will solve everything.

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2018/12/09/must-take-brussels-steel-unity-pms-deal-voted/
    When they offered him 250k a week for a column, do you reckon they made it clear it had to be a different column each week?
  • May has spoken with Tusk and Varadkar tonight.

    What were they talking about. I’m a celeb finale?
  • kle4 said:

    Scott_P said:
    Oh please gods let it not be Boris. We need to negotiate but we're told we need a true believer right? How exactly does Boris meet that criteria?
    Boris's column tonight is the same thing he's been writing for months about how we just need to dump the backstop and withhold the money and suddenly a Canada-style agreement will solve everything.

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2018/12/09/must-take-brussels-steel-unity-pms-deal-voted/
    It's common sense, something May lacks.

    Even kle4 seems to have (if I read it correctly) accepted that it would be logical for Brussels/Dublin to back down on backstop if we take it to the wire and just not sure if they will.
  • Evening all, trust you are all well. I've been lurking faithfully these past few weeks but have avoided posting to date, but these two excellent pieces from Alanbrooke have encouraged me to put my head above the parapet.

    Whether or not his conclusions are correct, Alanbrooke's focus on the long term implications is most welcome. As our PM's focus is solely on how to get to the end of the next crisis, and the politicians' focus has been on their own/their party's immediate interests, it is no surprise that the dialogue on here has followed suit.

    If all that mattered was short term financial stability, it would be an easy decision to make - revoke A50 and carry on as we were before. But the fact is, the long and mid term implications dwarf the short term effects. Well they certainly do for someone with 25 years of his working life ahead of him. And the reality is, as Alanbrooke has laid out, what might be the best policy for the next couple of years may be a dreadful long term decision. Or not as the case may be - there are difficult and varying long term implications whichever path we take, and there are merits and demerits to each course of action.

    It's the certainty of some people on here that worries me, the belittling of fellow posters for holding different views. We're entering into dangerous uncharted waters and surely what we should be doing is listening rather than talking over each other. In Cabinet, at Party level, in Parliament, on this forum and in public.

    My view, for what it's worth is that May's deal without the backstop would be adequate and would unite more than divide, and we need to at least see if Prodi is right - reject the deal and go back to Brussels and outline our position. Nothing ventured, nothing gained. If we fail, then I really don't know - but whatever is decided, it shouldn't just be based on short term thinking
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 54,710
    edited December 2018

    kle4 said:

    Scott_P said:
    Oh please gods let it not be Boris. We need to negotiate but we're told we need a true believer right? How exactly does Boris meet that criteria?
    Boris's column tonight is the same thing he's been writing for months about how we just need to dump the backstop and withhold the money and suddenly a Canada-style agreement will solve everything.

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2018/12/09/must-take-brussels-steel-unity-pms-deal-voted/
    It's common sense, something May lacks.

    Even kle4 seems to have (if I read it correctly) accepted that it would be logical for Brussels/Dublin to back down on backstop if we take it to the wire and just not sure if they will.
    I wish they would, and given the pronouncements from us, the EU and the Irish about what we don't want to happen on the Irish border I struggle to see why the backstop is as necessary as the EU says it is. I don't know that would be enough to see the deal agreed, but it would make it closer, and both sides claim a deal is best.

    However in this the EU's red lines seem to be the sticking point. You're right I see them backing down as unlikely - I think they'd rather see us suffer more than be seen to back down.

    Edit: I'd also prefer not to take things to the wire and am prepared to accept the backstop on that basis and trust the next leader to make a better fist at avoiding it being necessary, than blow it all up right now.
  • May has spoken with Tusk and Varadkar tonight.

    What were they talking about. I’m a celeb finale?
    The Future Partnership?
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 34,577

    Evening all, trust you are all well. I've been lurking faithfully these past few weeks but have avoided posting to date, but these two excellent pieces from Alanbrooke have encouraged me to put my head above the parapet.

    Whether or not his conclusions are correct, Alanbrooke's focus on the long term implications is most welcome. As our PM's focus is solely on how to get to the end of the next crisis, and the politicians' focus has been on their own/their party's immediate interests, it is no surprise that the dialogue on here has followed suit.

    If all that mattered was short term financial stability, it would be an easy decision to make - revoke A50 and carry on as we were before. But the fact is, the long and mid term implications dwarf the short term effects. Well they certainly do for someone with 25 years of his working life ahead of him. And the reality is, as Alanbrooke has laid out, what might be the best policy for the next couple of years may be a dreadful long term decision. Or not as the case may be - there are difficult and varying long term implications whichever path we take, and there are merits and demerits to each course of action.

    It's the certainty of some people on here that worries me, the belittling of fellow posters for holding different views. We're entering into dangerous uncharted waters and surely what we should be doing is listening rather than talking over each other. In Cabinet, at Party level, in Parliament, on this forum and in public.

    My view, for what it's worth is that May's deal without the backstop would be adequate and would unite more than divide, and we need to at least see if Prodi is right - reject the deal and go back to Brussels and outline our position. Nothing ventured, nothing gained. If we fail, then I really don't know - but whatever is decided, it shouldn't just be based on short term thinking

    You should lurk less, post more! Very good contribution.
  • AlistairAlistair Posts: 14,999
  • kle4 said:

    Scott_P said:
    Oh please gods let it not be Boris. We need to negotiate but we're told we need a true believer right? How exactly does Boris meet that criteria?
    Belief does not move mountains. Picks, explosives, hard work and applied knowledge do that. Boris' career is a litany of amusing excuses after blowing up the wrong thing.
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 13,208
    dixiedean said:

    kle4 said:

    Scott_P said:
    Oh please gods let it not be Boris. We need to negotiate but we're told we need a true believer right? How exactly does Boris meet that criteria?
    Boris's column tonight is the same thing he's been writing for months about how we just need to dump the backstop and withhold the money and suddenly a Canada-style agreement will solve everything.

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2018/12/09/must-take-brussels-steel-unity-pms-deal-voted/
    When they offered him 250k a week for a column, do you reckon they made it clear it had to be a different column each week?
    Clearly not. Perhaps he's a better negotiator than his watercannon efforts imply?
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 54,710

    May has spoken with Tusk and Varadkar tonight.

    What were they talking about. I’m a celeb finale?
    They probably want the inside scoop on which person they'll be negotiating with come Wednesday once she is gone.
  • Donny43Donny43 Posts: 634

    kle4 said:

    kle4 said:

    Depends if it is an opening gambit - to keep her own troops at bay (an impossibility I think, but for the sake of argument) she cannot very well suggest deal vs remain, so throw red meat to the Rees-Moggs by suggesting only some variety of leave is possible at least.
    Why make an opening gambit you cannot deliver?
    Because Plan B is to be made to the whole House isn't? So assuming she is not already ousted it would be about demonstrating to her ranks that she will fight the good fight now, not outcome. No it doesn't make total sense, but neither do what people demand of her - they lack a majority as enough remainer tories or ERG tories mean even with the DUP on side passing anything Brexit related relies on Labour votes. So to deliver anything she needs to await a Labour reaction, which will probably be - ok to the referendum, but it must also include remain.

    And then we're back where we are. I wasn't anticipating such a plan B would be effective.
    Not exactly.

    If (and as we've discussed it is an if) a Leaver takes over and gets May's deal amended to remove the backstop then that could pass Parliament easily. Remainers aren't going to vote down this deal because its missing a backstop and leave a Leave PM facing no deal.
    Possibly even removing the EU's veto on ending the backstop would do it. Assuming Labour stopped playing silly games.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 22,499

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    kle4 said:

    Scott_P said:
    Who cares about May?! Why are people only seeming to care about this issue based on if it causes May to go or not?! Brexit is more important, the question should be how we get to a resolution, and if that happens to lead to May staying or leaving so be it.
    We get to a resolution by having a PM who can get us to a resolution. That isn't May.
    There is no resolution beyond the Deal May agreed other than No Deal or Remain/BINO.
    Yes there is.

    If you believe there's no possible other negotiations because the other side have said so then you're the most gullible person on earth and I have a bridge to sell to you.
    You persist in your unicorn fantasies then while the rest of us live in the real world, this is the only Deal on offer and the backstop is inescapable, it is this Deal, No Deal or no Brexit at all
    Tell us, what's your background in international negotiations? Because you speak with such certainty, I'd REALLY love to see your CV...
    What has that got to do with anything? When we are negotiating with a market almost 10 times our size we are not going to be able to dictate terms to them however brilliant the CV of the negotiator
    Bilge. I've completed plenty of satisfactory deals with megacorps that had a market cap 500 or 1,000 times larger than mine.
    In how many of those did you get them to agree to change their longstanding business model ?

  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 34,577

    May has spoken with Tusk and Varadkar tonight.

    What were they talking about. I’m a celeb finale?
    Strictly more like....
  • kle4 said:

    May has spoken with Tusk and Varadkar tonight.

    What were they talking about. I’m a celeb finale?
    They probably want the inside scoop on which person they'll be negotiating with come Wednesday once she is gone.
    Harry redknapp?
  • Donny43 said:

    kle4 said:

    kle4 said:

    Depends if it is an opening gambit - to keep her own troops at bay (an impossibility I think, but for the sake of argument) she cannot very well suggest deal vs remain, so throw red meat to the Rees-Moggs by suggesting only some variety of leave is possible at least.
    Why make an opening gambit you cannot deliver?
    Because Plan B is to be made to the whole House isn't? So assuming she is not already ousted it would be about demonstrating to her ranks that she will fight the good fight now, not outcome. No it doesn't make total sense, but neither do what people demand of her - they lack a majority as enough remainer tories or ERG tories mean even with the DUP on side passing anything Brexit related relies on Labour votes. So to deliver anything she needs to await a Labour reaction, which will probably be - ok to the referendum, but it must also include remain.

    And then we're back where we are. I wasn't anticipating such a plan B would be effective.
    Not exactly.

    If (and as we've discussed it is an if) a Leaver takes over and gets May's deal amended to remove the backstop then that could pass Parliament easily. Remainers aren't going to vote down this deal because its missing a backstop and leave a Leave PM facing no deal.
    Possibly even removing the EU's veto on ending the backstop would do it. Assuming Labour stopped playing silly games.
    Remove the veto and there is no backstop, may as well just remove the backstop. Although a 2 year unilateral exit would put us exactly back to where we were before triggering Article 50.
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 13,208
    Donny43 said:

    kle4 said:

    kle4 said:

    Depends if it is an opening gambit - to keep her own troops at bay (an impossibility I think, but for the sake of argument) she cannot very well suggest deal vs remain, so throw red meat to the Rees-Moggs by suggesting only some variety of leave is possible at least.
    Why make an opening gambit you cannot deliver?
    Because Plan B is to be made to the whole House isn't? So assuming she is not already ousted it would be about demonstrating to her ranks that she will fight the good fight now, not outcome. No it doesn't make total sense, but neither do what people demand of her - they lack a majority as enough remainer tories or ERG tories mean even with the DUP on side passing anything Brexit related relies on Labour votes. So to deliver anything she needs to await a Labour reaction, which will probably be - ok to the referendum, but it must also include remain.

    And then we're back where we are. I wasn't anticipating such a plan B would be effective.
    Not exactly.

    If (and as we've discussed it is an if) a Leaver takes over and gets May's deal amended to remove the backstop then that could pass Parliament easily. Remainers aren't going to vote down this deal because its missing a backstop and leave a Leave PM facing no deal.
    Possibly even removing the EU's veto on ending the backstop would do it. Assuming Labour stopped playing silly games.
    I think the tiny flaw in your plan is that the EU might not agree to ending their veto?
  • FF43FF43 Posts: 10,962

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    kle4 said:

    Scott_P said:
    Who cares about May?! Why are people only seeming to care about this issue based on if it causes May to go or not?! Brexit is more important, the question should be how we get to a resolution, and if that happens to lead to May staying or leaving so be it.
    We get to a resolution by having a PM who can get us to a resolution. That isn't May.
    There is no resolution beyond the Deal May agreed other than No Deal or Remain/BINO.
    Yes there is.

    If you believe there's no possible other negotiations because the other side have said so then you're the most gullible person on earth and I have a bridge to sell to you.
    You persist in your unicorn fantasies then while the rest of us live in the real world, this is the only Deal on offer and the backstop is inescapable, it is this Deal, No Deal or no Brexit at all
    This is the only Deal on offer as its the only deal negotiated because May is piss weak.

    If the backstop is inescapable then No Deal. Fine by me. Its no backstop or no deal for me.
    Good job the HoC and the country at large have got more sense than you then.
    Does it?

    Looks like the HoC is going to agree with me and reject this deal. Remove the backstop and it will pass the deal. Just as I support.
    I cannot see it though the EU may play with words

    Personally I would challenge it's legality in the ECJ
    If the HoC stands firm the EU will have to choose between No Deal and No Backstop.

    Do you really think the EU would really choose No Deal? The only reason we are where we are is because the EU thought the UK wouldn't stand firm.
    Why would the EU be more frightened of No Deal than us? If you are going to call people's bluff you need to be confident they will be more terrified of the consequences than you are. "Do what you want" isn't the response you want to a threat

    Our European counterparts may be very good actors but they are giving a very good impression of supreme indifference to Britains No Deal talk, while it is certainly spooking those on our side of the English channel
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 34,577
    Nigelb said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    kle4 said:

    Scott_P said:
    Who cares about May?! Why are people only seeming to care about this issue based on if it causes May to go or not?! Brexit is more important, the question should be how we get to a resolution, and if that happens to lead to May staying or leaving so be it.
    We get to a resolution by having a PM who can get us to a resolution. That isn't May.
    There is no resolution beyond the Deal May agreed other than No Deal or Remain/BINO.
    Yes there is.

    If you believe there's no possible other negotiations because the other side have said so then you're the most gullible person on earth and I have a bridge to sell to you.
    You persist in your unicorn fantasies then while the rest of us live in the real world, this is the only Deal on offer and the backstop is inescapable, it is this Deal, No Deal or no Brexit at all
    Tell us, what's your background in international negotiations? Because you speak with such certainty, I'd REALLY love to see your CV...
    What has that got to do with anything? When we are negotiating with a market almost 10 times our size we are not going to be able to dictate terms to them however brilliant the CV of the negotiator
    Bilge. I've completed plenty of satisfactory deals with megacorps that had a market cap 500 or 1,000 times larger than mine.
    In how many of those did you get them to agree to change their longstanding business model ?
    My reputation's based on highly creative deal-making.
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 13,208
    IanB2 said:

    notme said:

    notme said:

    Scott_P said:

    Small businesses negotiate good terms with bigger businesses all the time. Size isn't everything.

    True.

    We negotiated the best deal with the EU anyone got ever.

    And the Brexiteers torched it.
    A deal so awful that we had to negotiate a rebate mechanism. Even with that rebate mechanism we have been the second largest contributor for most of our period of membership despite been much poorer than many of the other member states. Even now, with the rebate we are not even close to getting more out than we put in. The EU has lost its little piggy bank.
    You seem to be having a fact bypass there @notme. On what basis was the UK (5th largest GDP in the world) "poorer than many of the other member states"?
    I was talking in a historical context, before we went through the economic liberalism of the mid 80s and early 90s.
    Even there I am afraid it simply isn't true. When we joined the EU we were the 5th largest economy in the world. We dipped down to 7th at one point but are now 5th or 6th again. The only countries in the EU that have ever been richer than us are Germany (consistently) and occasionally France. I think Italy might have snuck ahead of us once but I would have to go and check.

    That is a very long way from being poorer than many members states.
    Indeed. And our net contribution is way below that of Germany and France and just above that of Italy.

    But tbh, I don't think @notme is much concerned with pesky facts.
    And it isn't him anyway...
    :lol: very good
  • FF43 said:

    If the HoC stands firm the EU will have to choose between No Deal and No Backstop.

    Do you really think the EU would really choose No Deal? The only reason we are where we are is because the EU thought the UK wouldn't stand firm.

    Why would the EU be more frightened of No Deal than us? If you are going to call people's bluff you need to be confident they will be more terrified of the consequences than you are. "Do what you want" isn't the response you want to a threat

    Our European counterparts may be very good actors but they are giving a very good impression of supreme indifference to Britains No Deal talk, while it is certainly spooking those on our side of the English channel
    Because we gain our Leaver principles (May's old red lines) from no deal: end of ECJ law, exit Single Market, exit Customs Union.

    EU gains nothing from No Deal.

    Ireland in particular gains nothing from No Deal. It is a pure loss to them.
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453

    My reputation's based on highly creative deal-making.

    So, none then.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 34,577

    dixiedean said:

    kle4 said:

    Scott_P said:
    Oh please gods let it not be Boris. We need to negotiate but we're told we need a true believer right? How exactly does Boris meet that criteria?
    Boris's column tonight is the same thing he's been writing for months about how we just need to dump the backstop and withhold the money and suddenly a Canada-style agreement will solve everything.

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2018/12/09/must-take-brussels-steel-unity-pms-deal-voted/
    When they offered him 250k a week for a column, do you reckon they made it clear it had to be a different column each week?
    Clearly not. Perhaps he's a better negotiator than his watercannon efforts imply?
    The really poor negotiating was done by Khan - in virtually giving them away.

    But then hey, he didn't care about getting a goood price; he was playing politics.
  • Donny43Donny43 Posts: 634

    Donny43 said:

    kle4 said:

    kle4 said:

    Depends if it is an opening gambit - to keep her own troops at bay (an impossibility I think, but for the sake of argument) she cannot very well suggest deal vs remain, so throw red meat to the Rees-Moggs by suggesting only some variety of leave is possible at least.
    Why make an opening gambit you cannot deliver?
    Because Plan B is to be made to the whole House isn't? So assuming she is not already ousted it would be about demonstrating to her ranks that she will fight the good fight now, not outcome. No it doesn't make total sense, but neither do what people demand of her - they lack a majority as enough remainer tories or ERG tories mean even with the DUP on side passing anything Brexit related relies on Labour votes. So to deliver anything she needs to await a Labour reaction, which will probably be - ok to the referendum, but it must also include remain.

    And then we're back where we are. I wasn't anticipating such a plan B would be effective.
    Not exactly.

    If (and as we've discussed it is an if) a Leaver takes over and gets May's deal amended to remove the backstop then that could pass Parliament easily. Remainers aren't going to vote down this deal because its missing a backstop and leave a Leave PM facing no deal.
    Possibly even removing the EU's veto on ending the backstop would do it. Assuming Labour stopped playing silly games.
    I think the tiny flaw in your plan is that the EU might not agree to ending their veto?
    Depends if they actually want a deal, doesn't it?

    It doesn't need to be a unilateral end - decision by some suitable independent tribunal would do it. If one such exists.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 34,577
    Scott_P said:

    My reputation's based on highly creative deal-making.

    So, none then.
    Demonstrating, again, you know nothing.
  • Donny43Donny43 Posts: 634

    dixiedean said:

    kle4 said:

    Scott_P said:
    Oh please gods let it not be Boris. We need to negotiate but we're told we need a true believer right? How exactly does Boris meet that criteria?
    Boris's column tonight is the same thing he's been writing for months about how we just need to dump the backstop and withhold the money and suddenly a Canada-style agreement will solve everything.

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2018/12/09/must-take-brussels-steel-unity-pms-deal-voted/
    When they offered him 250k a week for a column, do you reckon they made it clear it had to be a different column each week?
    Clearly not. Perhaps he's a better negotiator than his watercannon efforts imply?
    The really poor negotiating was done by Khan - in virtually giving them away.

    But then hey, he didn't care about getting a goood price; he was playing politics.
    So was May in banning their use.
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 13,208

    dixiedean said:

    kle4 said:

    Scott_P said:
    Oh please gods let it not be Boris. We need to negotiate but we're told we need a true believer right? How exactly does Boris meet that criteria?
    Boris's column tonight is the same thing he's been writing for months about how we just need to dump the backstop and withhold the money and suddenly a Canada-style agreement will solve everything.

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2018/12/09/must-take-brussels-steel-unity-pms-deal-voted/
    When they offered him 250k a week for a column, do you reckon they made it clear it had to be a different column each week?
    Clearly not. Perhaps he's a better negotiator than his watercannon efforts imply?
    The really poor negotiating was done by Khan - in virtually giving them away.

    But then hey, he didn't care about getting a goood price; he was playing politics.
    But didn't the Tory Home Secretary ban their use?
  • RogerRoger Posts: 12,698
    I haven't got the faintest idea what Boris's backstop is. It's what the French call 'fucking flies'. If 1% of the population has any more idea than I do I'd be amazed. If they cared I'd be even more amazed.

    Isn't it time we got behind a human being like Caroline Lucas kicked these self regarding Tory Brexiteers into a bottomless pit?
  • Richard_NabaviRichard_Nabavi Posts: 26,066
    edited December 2018

    IanB2 said:

    There will be a huge political backlash if we don’t leave. If we stay in, it will finish the Tories for a generation because the betrayal of Brexit, having betrayed fishing (again) and the DUP means no one will ever trust them, certainly not the electorate.

    Corbyn will be the big winner from no Brexit and then we shall all be in serious trouble even those who don’t care about Britain being subsumed into a United States of Europe.

    Nah, most people would be glad that it's over; the ERG's star has crashed and burned, yes they will make a fuss but they'll be back where they started as eccentrics to whom most people won't give a hearing.
    I am not worried about the ERG. I tend to agree with you about them. I am rather more concerned about the righteous indignation of the 17.4m who voted Leave and who will know the Tory Remoaners denied them what they won at the ballot box.
    It won't be Tory Remoaners, but Tory and non-Tory Leavers in cahoots with Labour, the LibDems and the SNP who will have denied them what they won at the ballot box. If the ERG and heavy friends hadn't done a great job trashing the implementation of Brexit, it would be about to pass parliament and we'd be definitely leaving on March 29th.
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453

    Demonstrating, again, you know nothing.

    I know the answer was zero, and so does everybody else
  • FF43 said:

    If the HoC stands firm the EU will have to choose between No Deal and No Backstop.

    Do you really think the EU would really choose No Deal? The only reason we are where we are is because the EU thought the UK wouldn't stand firm.

    Why would the EU be more frightened of No Deal than us? If you are going to call people's bluff you need to be confident they will be more terrified of the consequences than you are. "Do what you want" isn't the response you want to a threat

    Our European counterparts may be very good actors but they are giving a very good impression of supreme indifference to Britains No Deal talk, while it is certainly spooking those on our side of the English channel
    Because we gain our Leaver principles (May's old red lines) from no deal: end of ECJ law, exit Single Market, exit Customs Union.

    EU gains nothing from No Deal.

    Ireland in particular gains nothing from No Deal. It is a pure loss to them.
    We also have something that the EU is in great need of - money - which is why advancing a larger proportion of our 39bn on day 1 in return for removing the backstop would be a good collaborative offer that benefits both parties with few downsides. They may not accept but it is a logical idea that should be at least tried.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 54,710
    "I have officially been backing the position the Prime Minister is pushing. Now vote for me to stand up and say what an idiot plan it was and how we need to get tough"
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 13,208
    Scott_P said:

    Demonstrating, again, you know nothing.

    I know the answer was zero, and so does everybody else
    Hey, it takes a lot to get those multi-billion global corps to hire marquees! :wink:
  • Donny43 said:

    kle4 said:

    kle4 said:

    Depends if it is an opening gambit - to keep her own troops at bay (an impossibility I think, but for the sake of argument) she cannot very well suggest deal vs remain, so throw red meat to the Rees-Moggs by suggesting only some variety of leave is possible at least.
    Why make an opening gambit you cannot deliver?
    Because Plan B is to be made to the whole House isn't? So assuming she is not already ousted it would be about demonstrating to her ranks that she will fight the good fight now, not outcome. No it doesn't make total sense, but neither do what people demand of her - they lack a majority as enough remainer tories or ERG tories mean even with the DUP on side passing anything Brexit related relies on Labour votes. So to deliver anything she needs to await a Labour reaction, which will probably be - ok to the referendum, but it must also include remain.

    And then we're back where we are. I wasn't anticipating such a plan B would be effective.
    Not exactly.

    If (and as we've discussed it is an if) a Leaver takes over and gets May's deal amended to remove the backstop then that could pass Parliament easily. Remainers aren't going to vote down this deal because its missing a backstop and leave a Leave PM facing no deal.
    Possibly even removing the EU's veto on ending the backstop would do it. Assuming Labour stopped playing silly games.
    I think the tiny flaw in your plan is that the EU might not agree to ending their veto?
    The backstop is there because no Irish government will ever trust any UK government's promises about Ireland. They will only accept legally-watertight arrangements. The EU currently supports this position thus to get rid of the backstop the UK's options are to either meet the Irish concerns or else to somehow separate the EU from its support for Ireland.
  • IanB2 said:

    There will be a huge political backlash if we don’t leave. If we stay in, it will finish the Tories for a generation because the betrayal of Brexit, having betrayed fishing (again) and the DUP means no one will ever trust them, certainly not the electorate.

    Corbyn will be the big winner from no Brexit and then we shall all be in serious trouble even those who don’t care about Britain being subsumed into a United States of Europe.

    Nah, most people would be glad that it's over; the ERG's star has crashed and burned, yes they will make a fuss but they'll be back where they started as eccentrics to whom most people won't give a hearing.
    I am not worried about the ERG. I tend to agree with you about them. I am rather more concerned about the righteous indignation of the 17.4m who voted Leave and who will know the Tory Remoaners denied them what they won at the ballot box.
    It won't be Tory Remoaners, but Tory and non-Tory Leavers in cahoots with Labour, the LibDems and the SNP who will have denied them what they won at the ballot box. If the ERG and heavy friends hadn't done a great job trashing the implementation of Brexit, it would be about to pass parliament and we'd be definitely leaving on March 29th.
    So?

    Why would a Hotel California/purgatory Brexit be worth agreeing to?
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 34,577
    Scott_P said:

    Demonstrating, again, you know nothing.

    I know the answer was zero, and so does everybody else
    You know nothing, but you express that lack of knowledge with a firmness that is supposed to bully folks into backing down.

    I could share examples. But - fuck off. Please. Just fuck off.
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453

    I could share examples.

    Go on then.

    You only need 1...
  • Richard_NabaviRichard_Nabavi Posts: 26,066
    edited December 2018

    IanB2 said:

    There will be a huge political backlash if we don’t leave. If we stay in, it will finish the Tories for a generation because the betrayal of Brexit, having betrayed fishing (again) and the DUP means no one will ever trust them, certainly not the electorate.

    Corbyn will be the big winner from no Brexit and then we shall all be in serious trouble even those who don’t care about Britain being subsumed into a United States of Europe.

    Nah, most people would be glad that it's over; the ERG's star has crashed and burned, yes they will make a fuss but they'll be back where they started as eccentrics to whom most people won't give a hearing.
    I am not worried about the ERG. I tend to agree with you about them. I am rather more concerned about the righteous indignation of the 17.4m who voted Leave and who will know the Tory Remoaners denied them what they won at the ballot box.
    It won't be Tory Remoaners, but Tory and non-Tory Leavers in cahoots with Labour, the LibDems and the SNP who will have denied them what they won at the ballot box. If the ERG and heavy friends hadn't done a great job trashing the implementation of Brexit, it would be about to pass parliament and we'd be definitely leaving on March 29th.
    So?

    Why would a Hotel California/purgatory Brexit be worth agreeing to?
    Don't ask me, it was Brexiteers who wanted:

    - An end to the CAP
    - An end to the CFP
    - Leaving the Single Market
    - Leaving the Customs Union
    - An end to Freedom of Movement
    - An end to ECJ interference in domestic law
    - An end to paying vast sums to the EU
    - A free-trade deal with the EU
    - A smooth transition

    Now it turns out they and you don't want that. I really haven't the faintest glimmer of an idea why you and other leavers have changed your minds and in many cases are accusing the PM who has painstakingly negotiated it of something akin to treason, but what I do know is that the change means that there's now zero reason for anyone else to respect the referendum result.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 34,577

    Scott_P said:

    Demonstrating, again, you know nothing.

    I know the answer was zero, and so does everybody else
    Hey, it takes a lot to get those multi-billion global corps to hire marquees! :wink:
    I was hired by them. One has a market cap of over US$200 billion. But I enjoyed being in independents/start ups much more.

    No doubt Scott_P has also been the deal-maker that took a start up to the edge of the FTSE100 in under 5 years.

    Yeah, right....
  • Donny43Donny43 Posts: 634

    IanB2 said:

    There will be a huge political backlash if we don’t leave. If we stay in, it will finish the Tories for a generation because the betrayal of Brexit, having betrayed fishing (again) and the DUP means no one will ever trust them, certainly not the electorate.

    Corbyn will be the big winner from no Brexit and then we shall all be in serious trouble even those who don’t care about Britain being subsumed into a United States of Europe.

    Nah, most people would be glad that it's over; the ERG's star has crashed and burned, yes they will make a fuss but they'll be back where they started as eccentrics to whom most people won't give a hearing.
    I am not worried about the ERG. I tend to agree with you about them. I am rather more concerned about the righteous indignation of the 17.4m who voted Leave and who will know the Tory Remoaners denied them what they won at the ballot box.
    It won't be Tory Remoaners, but Tory and non-Tory Leavers in cahoots with Labour, the LibDems and the SNP who will have denied them what they won at the ballot box. If the ERG and heavy friends hadn't done a great job trashing the implementation of Brexit, it would be about to pass parliament and we'd be definitely leaving on March 29th.
    So?

    Why would a Hotel California/purgatory Brexit be worth agreeing to?
    Don't ask me, it was Brexiteers who wanted:

    - An end to the CAP
    - An end to the CFP
    - Leaving the Single Market
    - Leaving the Customs Union
    - An end to Freedom of Movement
    - An end to ECJ interference in domestic law
    - An end to paying vast sums to the EU
    - A free-trade deal with the EU
    - A smooth transition

    Now it turns out they and you don't want that. I really haven't the faintest glimmer of an idea why you and other leavers have changed your minds and in many cases are accusing the PM who has painstakingly negotiated it of something akin to treason, but what I do know is that if there's now zero reason for anyone else to respect the referendum result.
    The deal doesn't guarantee any of that as long as the EU retains a veto on moving out of transition.
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 13,208

    IanB2 said:

    There will be a huge political backlash if we don’t leave. If we stay in, it will finish the Tories for a generation because the betrayal of Brexit, having betrayed fishing (again) and the DUP means no one will ever trust them, certainly not the electorate.

    Corbyn will be the big winner from no Brexit and then we shall all be in serious trouble even those who don’t care about Britain being subsumed into a United States of Europe.

    Nah, most people would be glad that it's over; the ERG's star has crashed and burned, yes they will make a fuss but they'll be back where they started as eccentrics to whom most people won't give a hearing.
    I am not worried about the ERG. I tend to agree with you about them. I am rather more concerned about the righteous indignation of the 17.4m who voted Leave and who will know the Tory Remoaners denied them what they won at the ballot box.
    It won't be Tory Remoaners, but Tory and non-Tory Leavers in cahoots with Labour, the LibDems and the SNP who will have denied them what they won at the ballot box. If the ERG and heavy friends hadn't done a great job trashing the implementation of Brexit, it would be about to pass parliament and we'd be definitely leaving on March 29th.
    So?

    Why would a Hotel California/purgatory Brexit be worth agreeing to?
    Don't ask me, it was Brexiteers who wanted:

    - An end to the CAP
    - An end to the CFP
    - Leaving the Single Market
    - Leaving the Customs Union
    - An end to Freedom of Movement
    - An end to ECJ interference in domestic law
    - An end to paying vast sums to the EU
    - A free-trade deal with the EU
    - A smooth transition

    Now it turns out they and you don't want that. I really haven't the faintest glimmer of an idea why you and other leavers have changed your minds and in many cases are accusing the PM who has painstakingly negotiated it of something akin to treason, but what I do know is that if there's now zero reason for anyone else to respect the referendum result.
    It's a very strange pass Brexit has brought us to when I end up agreeing with just about every post @Richard_Nabavi makes.

    :smile:
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 13,208
    edited December 2018
    Donny43 said:

    IanB2 said:

    There will be a huge political backlash if we don’t leave. If we stay in, it will finish the Tories for a generation because the betrayal of Brexit, having betrayed fishing (again) and the DUP means no one will ever trust them, certainly not the electorate.

    Corbyn will be the big winner from no Brexit and then we shall all be in serious trouble even those who don’t care about Britain being subsumed into a United States of Europe.

    Nah, most people would be glad that it's over; the ERG's star has crashed and burned, yes they will make a fuss but they'll be back where they started as eccentrics to whom most people won't give a hearing.
    I am not worried about the ERG. I tend to agree with you about them. I am rather more concerned about the righteous indignation of the 17.4m who voted Leave and who will know the Tory Remoaners denied them what they won at the ballot box.
    It won't be Tory Remoaners, but Tory and non-Tory Leavers in cahoots with Labour, the LibDems and the SNP who will have denied them what they won at the ballot box. If the ERG and heavy friends hadn't done a great job trashing the implementation of Brexit, it would be about to pass parliament and we'd be definitely leaving on March 29th.
    So?

    Why would a Hotel California/purgatory Brexit be worth agreeing to?
    Don't ask me, it was Brexiteers who wanted:

    - An end to the CAP
    - An end to the CFP
    - Leaving the Single Market
    - Leaving the Customs Union
    - An end to Freedom of Movement
    - An end to ECJ interference in domestic law
    - An end to paying vast sums to the EU
    - A free-trade deal with the EU
    - A smooth transition

    Now it turns out they and you don't want that. I really haven't the faintest glimmer of an idea why you and other leavers have changed your minds and in many cases are accusing the PM who has painstakingly negotiated it of something akin to treason, but what I do know is that if there's now zero reason for anyone else to respect the referendum result.
    The deal doesn't guarantee any of that as long as the EU retains a veto on moving out of transition.
    Read the deal.

    Edit: if the deal's too long for you, this is a good summary:

    http://eulawanalysis.blogspot.com/2018/11/the-brexit-withdrawal-agreement.html
  • Donny43 said:

    IanB2 said:

    There will be a huge political backlash if we don’t leave. If we stay in, it will finish the Tories for a generation because the betrayal of Brexit, having betrayed fishing (again) and the DUP means no one will ever trust them, certainly not the electorate.

    Corbyn will be the big winner from no Brexit and then we shall all be in serious trouble even those who don’t care about Britain being subsumed into a United States of Europe.

    Nah, most people would be glad that it's over; the ERG's star has crashed and burned, yes they will make a fuss but they'll be back where they started as eccentrics to whom most people won't give a hearing.
    I am not worried about the ERG. I tend to agree with you about them. I am rather more concerned about the righteous indignation of the 17.4m who voted Leave and who will know the Tory Remoaners denied them what they won at the ballot box.
    It won't be Tory Remoaners, but Tory and non-Tory Leavers in cahoots with Labour, the LibDems and the SNP who will have denied them what they won at the ballot box. If the ERG and heavy friends hadn't done a great job trashing the implementation of Brexit, it would be about to pass parliament and we'd be definitely leaving on March 29th.
    So?

    Why would a Hotel California/purgatory Brexit be worth agreeing to?
    Don't ask me, it was Brexiteers who wanted:

    - An end to the CAP
    - An end to the CFP
    - Leaving the Single Market
    - Leaving the Customs Union
    - An end to Freedom of Movement
    - An end to ECJ interference in domestic law
    - An end to paying vast sums to the EU
    - A free-trade deal with the EU
    - A smooth transition

    Now it turns out they and you don't want that. I really haven't the faintest glimmer of an idea why you and other leavers have changed your minds and in many cases are accusing the PM who has painstakingly negotiated it of something akin to treason, but what I do know is that if there's now zero reason for anyone else to respect the referendum result.
    The deal doesn't guarantee any of that as long as the EU retains a veto on moving out of transition.
    Hang on, I thought the problem was that we would be stuck in the backstop, not the transition. Make your mind up;
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 34,577
    Donny43 said:

    IanB2 said:

    There will be a huge political backlash if we don’t leave. If we stay in, it will finish the Tories for a generation because the betrayal of Brexit, having betrayed fishing (again) and the DUP means no one will ever trust them, certainly not the electorate.

    Corbyn will be the big winner from no Brexit and then we shall all be in serious trouble even those who don’t care about Britain being subsumed into a United States of Europe.

    Nah, most people would be glad that it's over; the ERG's star has crashed and burned, yes they will make a fuss but they'll be back where they started as eccentrics to whom most people won't give a hearing.
    I am not worried about the ERG. I tend to agree with you about them. I am rather more concerned about the righteous indignation of the 17.4m who voted Leave and who will know the Tory Remoaners denied them what they won at the ballot box.
    It won't be Tory Remoaners, but Tory and non-Tory Leavers in cahoots with Labour, the LibDems and the SNP who will have denied them what they won at the ballot box. If the ERG and heavy friends hadn't done a great job trashing the implementation of Brexit, it would be about to pass parliament and we'd be definitely leaving on March 29th.
    So?

    Why would a Hotel California/purgatory Brexit be worth agreeing to?
    Don't ask me, it was Brexiteers who wanted:

    - An end to the CAP
    - An end to the CFP
    - Leaving the Single Market
    - Leaving the Customs Union
    - An end to Freedom of Movement
    - An end to ECJ interference in domestic law
    - An end to paying vast sums to the EU
    - A free-trade deal with the EU
    - A smooth transition

    Now it turns out they and you don't want that. I really haven't the faintest glimmer of an idea why you and other leavers have changed your minds and in many cases are accusing the PM who has painstakingly negotiated it of something akin to treason, but what I do know is that if there's now zero reason for anyone else to respect the referendum result.
    The deal doesn't guarantee any of that as long as the EU retains a veto on moving out of transition.
    This.
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453

    I was hired by them. One has a market cap of over US$200 billion. But I enjoyed being in independents/start ups much more.

    No doubt Scott_P has also been the deal-maker that took a start up to the edge of the FTSE100 in under 5 years.

    Yeah, right....

    So, still none.

    Noted.
  • Donny43Donny43 Posts: 634
    edited December 2018

    Donny43 said:

    IanB2 said:

    There will be a huge political backlash if we don’t leave. If we stay in, it will finish the Tories for a generation because the betrayal of Brexit, having betrayed fishing (again) and the DUP means no one will ever trust them, certainly not the electorate.

    Corbyn will be the big winner from no Brexit and then we shall all be in serious trouble even those who don’t care about Britain being subsumed into a United States of Europe.

    Nah, most people would be glad that it's over; the ERG's star has crashed and burned, yes they will make a fuss but they'll be back where they started as eccentrics to whom most people won't give a hearing.
    I am not worried about the ERG. I tend to agree with you about them. I am rather more concerned about the righteous indignation of the 17.4m who voted Leave and who will know the Tory Remoaners denied them what they won at the ballot box.
    It won't be Tory Remoaners, but Tory and non-Tory Leavers in cahoots with Labour, the LibDems and the SNP who will have denied them what they won at the ballot box. If the ERG and heavy friends hadn't done a great job trashing the implementation of Brexit, it would be about to pass parliament and we'd be definitely leaving on March 29th.
    So?

    Why would a Hotel California/purgatory Brexit be worth agreeing to?
    Don't ask me, it was Brexiteers who wanted:

    - An end to the CAP
    - An end to the CFP
    - Leaving the Single Market
    - Leaving the Customs Union
    - An end to Freedom of Movement
    - An end to ECJ interference in domestic law
    - An end to paying vast sums to the EU
    - A free-trade deal with the EU
    - A smooth transition

    Now it turns out they and you don't want that. I really haven't the faintest glimmer of an idea why you and other leavers have changed your minds and in many cases are accusing the PM who has painstakingly negotiated it of something akin to treason, but what I do know is that if there's now zero reason for anyone else to respect the referendum result.
    The deal doesn't guarantee any of that as long as the EU retains a veto on moving out of transition.
    Hang on, I thought the problem was that we would be stuck in the backstop, not the transition. Make your mind up;
    The backstop is to be used as an excuse to lock us in endless transition. You'd realise that if you didn't just blindly regurgitate the leader's lines to take.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 54,710
    Donny43 said:

    Donny43 said:

    IanB2 said:

    There will be a huge political backlash if we don’t leave. If we stay in, it will finish the Tories for a generation because the betrayal of Brexit, having betrayed fishing (again) and the DUP means no one will ever trust them, certainly not the electorate.

    Corbyn will be the big winner from no Brexit and then we shall all be in serious trouble even those who don’t care about Britain being subsumed into a United States of Europe.

    Nah, most people would be glad that it's over; the ERG's star has crashed and burned, yes they will make a fuss but they'll be back where they started as eccentrics to whom most people won't give a hearing.
    I am not worried about the ERG. I tend to agree with you about them. I am rather more concerned about the righteous indignation of the 17.4m who voted Leave and who will know the Tory Remoaners denied them what they won at the ballot box.
    It won't be Tory Remoaners, but Tory and non-Tory Leavers in cahoots with Labour, the LibDems and the SNP who will have denied them what they won at the ballot box. If the ERG and heavy friends hadn't done a great job trashing the implementation of Brexit, it would be about to pass parliament and we'd be definitely leaving on March 29th.
    So?

    Why would a Hotel California/purgatory Brexit be worth agreeing to?
    Don't ask me, it was Brexiteers who wanted:

    - An end to the CAP
    - An end to the CFP
    - Leaving the Single Market
    - Leaving the Customs Union
    - An end to Freedom of Movement
    - An end to ECJ interference in domestic law
    - An end to paying vast sums to the EU
    - A free-trade deal with the EU
    - A smooth transition

    Now it turns out they and you don't want that. I really haven't the faintest glimmer of an idea why you and other leavers have changed your minds and in many cases are accusing the PM who has painstakingly negotiated it of something akin to treason, but what I do know is that if there's now zero reason for anyone else to respect the referendum result.
    The deal doesn't guarantee any of that as long as the EU retains a veto on moving out of transition.
    Hang on, I thought the problem was that we would be stuck in the backstop, not the transition. Make your mind up;
    The backstop is to be used as an excuse to lock us in endless transition.
    Why would the EU want that?
  • Donny43Donny43 Posts: 634
    kle4 said:

    Donny43 said:

    Donny43 said:

    IanB2 said:



    Nah, most people would be glad that it's over; the ERG's star has crashed and burned, yes they will make a fuss but they'll be back where they started as eccentrics to whom most people won't give a hearing.

    I am not worried about the ERG. I tend to agree with you about them. I am rather more concerned about the righteous indignation of the 17.4m who voted Leave and who will know the Tory Remoaners denied them what they won at the ballot box.
    It won't be Tory Remoaners, but Tory and non-Tory Leavers in cahoots with Labour, the LibDems and the SNP who will have denied them what they won at the ballot box. If the ERG and heavy friends hadn't done a great job trashing the implementation of Brexit, it would be about to pass parliament and we'd be definitely leaving on March 29th.
    So?

    Why would a Hotel California/purgatory Brexit be worth agreeing to?
    Don't ask me, it was Brexiteers who wanted:

    - An end to the CAP
    - An end to the CFP
    - Leaving the Single Market
    - Leaving the Customs Union
    - An end to Freedom of Movement
    - An end to ECJ interference in domestic law
    - An end to paying vast sums to the EU
    - A free-trade deal with the EU
    - A smooth transition

    Now it turns out they and you don't want that. I really haven't the faintest glimmer of an idea why you and other leavers have changed your minds and in many cases are accusing the PM who has painstakingly negotiated it of something akin to treason, but what I do know is that if there's now zero reason for anyone else to respect the referendum result.
    The deal doesn't guarantee any of that as long as the EU retains a veto on moving out of transition.
    Hang on, I thought the problem was that we would be stuck in the backstop, not the transition. Make your mind up;
    The backstop is to be used as an excuse to lock us in endless transition.
    Why would the EU want that?
    France wants our fish. Spain wants Gibraltar. For a start.
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 13,208
    Donny43 said:

    Donny43 said:

    IanB2 said:

    Nah, most people would be glad that it's over; the ERG's star has crashed and burned, yes they will make a fuss but they'll be back where they started as eccentrics to whom most people won't give a hearing.
    I am not worried about the ERG. I tend to agree with you about them. I am rather more concerned about the righteous indignation of the 17.4m who voted Leave and who will know the Tory Remoaners denied them what they won at the ballot box.
    It won't be Tory Remoaners, but Tory and non-Tory Leavers in cahoots with Labour, the LibDems and the SNP who will have denied them what they won at the ballot box. If the ERG and heavy friends hadn't done a great job trashing the implementation of Brexit, it would be about to pass parliament and we'd be definitely leaving on March 29th.
    So?

    Why would a Hotel California/purgatory Brexit be worth agreeing to?
    Don't ask me, it was Brexiteers who wanted:

    - An end to the CAP
    - An end to the CFP
    - Leaving the Single Market
    - Leaving the Customs Union
    - An end to Freedom of Movement
    - An end to ECJ interference in domestic law
    - An end to paying vast sums to the EU
    - A free-trade deal with the EU
    - A smooth transition

    Now it turns out they and you don't want that. I really haven't the faintest glimmer of an idea why you and other leavers have changed your minds and in many cases are accusing the PM who has painstakingly negotiated it of something akin to treason, but what I do know is that if there's now zero reason for anyone else to respect the referendum result.
    The deal doesn't guarantee any of that as long as the EU retains a veto on moving out of transition.
    Hang on, I thought the problem was that we would be stuck in the backstop, not the transition. Make your mind up;
    The backstop is to be used as an excuse to lock us in endless transition. You'd realise that if you didn't just blindly regurgitate the leader's lines to take.
    Mate, now you're just making yourself look silly. Read the deal.

    https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/withdrawal-agreement-and-political-declaration

    or this summary:
    http://eulawanalysis.blogspot.com/2018/11/the-brexit-withdrawal-agreement.html
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 34,577
    Scott_P said:

    I was hired by them. One has a market cap of over US$200 billion. But I enjoyed being in independents/start ups much more.

    No doubt Scott_P has also been the deal-maker that took a start up to the edge of the FTSE100 in under 5 years.

    Yeah, right....

    So, still none.

    Noted.
    Lol. Like I give a shiny shit.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 54,710
    edited December 2018
    Was just watching a web series about the run up to WW1, and reflections on how terrible outcomes can occur when no side has the courage, will or luck to back down. Thank goodness our current crises with not backing down will only lead to massive bitterness, discontent, economic disruption.

    A pleasant evening to all.
  • bigjohnowlsbigjohnowls Posts: 14,761
    Scott_P said:

    I was hired by them. One has a market cap of over US$200 billion. But I enjoyed being in independents/start ups much more.

    No doubt Scott_P has also been the deal-maker that took a start up to the edge of the FTSE100 in under 5 years.

    Yeah, right....

    So, still none.

    Noted.
    Hope you don't need a big tent you have blown it!!!
  • Donny43 said:

    The backstop is to be used as an excuse to lock us in endless transition. You'd realise that if you didn't just blindly regurgitate the leader's lines to take.

    Ah, the most idiotic of idiots' ad hominem attacks.

    So you think the EU wants the transition to go on for ever? So why did they insist on it being time-limited? And why on earth would they want the uncertainty and hassle to drag on? It's raving, frothing, bonkers nonsense.
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 13,208
    edited December 2018

    Donny43 said:

    IanB2 said:

    It won't be Tory Remoaners, but Tory and non-Tory Leavers in cahoots with Labour, the LibDems and the SNP who will have denied them what they won at the ballot box. If the ERG and heavy friends hadn't done a great job trashing the implementation of Brexit, it would be about to pass parliament and we'd be definitely leaving on March 29th.
    So?

    Why would a Hotel California/purgatory Brexit be worth agreeing to?
    Don't ask me, it was Brexiteers who wanted:

    - An end to the CAP
    - An end to the CFP
    - Leaving the Single Market
    - Leaving the Customs Union
    - An end to Freedom of Movement
    - An end to ECJ interference in domestic law
    - An end to paying vast sums to the EU
    - A free-trade deal with the EU
    - A smooth transition

    Now it turns out they and you don't want that. I really haven't the faintest glimmer of an idea why you and other leavers have changed your minds and in many cases are accusing the PM who has painstakingly negotiated it of something akin to treason, but what I do know is that if there's now zero reason for anyone else to respect the referendum result.
    The deal doesn't guarantee any of that as long as the EU retains a veto on moving out of transition.
    This.
    The EU do not have a veto on us moving out of Transition.

    http://eulawanalysis.blogspot.com/2018/11/the-brexit-withdrawal-agreement.html

    Key question: Can the UK be forced to stay in the transition period indefinitely?

    No – and no. First of all, any extension of the transition period has to be agreed jointly, as noted already. Secondly, any extension won’t be indefinite, since the negotiators will add a final possible date for extension when they agree the final text of the withdrawal agreement.

    On the other hand, the UK might theoretically end up in the backstop relating to Northern Ireland indefinitely. Although the withdrawal agreement says that this arrangement must be temporary, unlike the transition period there is no final date to end it and the UK cannot unilaterally end it at a certain date. However, the backstop is more limited in scope than the transition period, as it concerns only some EU laws (mainly on external trade, customs, and goods regulation, plus some limited application of EU laws on labour, the environment, state aids and competition in its Annexes). In particular, the backstop does not concern the free movement of people or services, or contribution to the EU budget.
  • Donny43Donny43 Posts: 634

    Donny43 said:

    Donny43 said:

    IanB2 said:

    Nah, most people would be glad that it's over; the ERG's star has crashed and burned, yes they will make a fuss but they'll be back where they started as eccentrics to whom most people won't give a hearing.
    I am not worried about the ERG. I tend to agree with you about them. I am rather more concerned about the righteous indignation of the 17.4m who voted Leave and who will know the Tory Remoaners denied them what they won at the ballot box.
    It won't be Tory Remoaners, but Tory and non-Tory Leavers in cahoots with Labour, the LibDems and the SNP who will have denied them what they won at the ballot box. If the ERG and heavy friends hadn't done a great job trashing the implementation of Brexit, it would be about to pass parliament and we'd be definitely leaving on March 29th.
    So?

    Why would a Hotel California/purgatory Brexit be worth agreeing to?
    Don't ask me, it was Brexiteers who wanted:

    - An end to the CAP
    - An end to the CFP
    - Leaving the Single Market
    - Leaving the Customs Union
    - An end to Freedom of Movement
    - An end to ECJ interference in domestic law
    - An end to paying vast sums to the EU
    - A free-trade deal with the EU
    - A smooth transition

    Now it turns out they and you don't want that. I really haven't the faintest glimmer of an idea why you and other leavers have changed your minds and in many cases are accusing the PM who has painstakingly negotiated it of something akin to treason, but what I do know is that if there's now zero reason for anyone else to respect the referendum result.
    The deal doesn't guarantee any of that as long as the EU retains a veto on moving out of transition.
    Hang on, I thought the problem was that we would be stuck in the backstop, not the transition. Make your mind up;
    The backstop is to be used as an excuse to lock us in endless transition. You'd realise that if you didn't just blindly regurgitate the leader's lines to take.
    Mate
    We've never met.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 54,710
    edited December 2018
    Donny43 said:

    kle4 said:

    Donny43 said:

    Donny43 said:

    IanB2 said:



    Nah, most people would be glad that it's over; the ERG's star has crashed and burned, yes they will make a fuss but they'll be back where they started as eccentrics to whom most people won't give a hearing.

    I am not worried about the ERG. I tend to agree with you about them. I am rather more concerned about the righteous indignation of the 17.4m who voted Leave and who will know the Tory Remoaners denied them what they won at the ballot box.
    It won't be Tory Remoaners, but Tory and non-Tory Leavers in cahoots with Labour, the LibDems and the SNP who will have denied them what they won at the ballot box. If the ERG and heavy friends hadn't done a great job trashing the implementation of Brexit, it would be about to pass parliament and we'd be definitely leaving on March 29th.
    So?

    Why would a Hotel California/purgatory Brexit be worth agreeing to?
    Don't ask me, it was Brexiteers who wanted:

    - An end to the CAP
    - An end to the CFP
    - Leaving the Single Market
    - Leaving the Customs Union
    - An end to Freedom of Movement
    - An end to ECJ interference in domestic law
    - An end to paying vast sums to the EU
    - A free-trade deal with the EU
    - A smooth transition

    Now it turns out they and you don't want that. I really haven't the faintest glimmer of an idea why you and other leavers have changed your minds and in many cases are accusing the PM who has painstakingly negotiated it of something akin to treason, but what I do know is that if there's now zero reason for anyone else to respect the referendum result.
    The deal doesn't guarantee any of that as long as the EU retains a veto on moving out of transition.
    Hang on, I thought the problem was that we would be stuck in the backstop, not the transition. Make your mind up;
    The backstop is to be used as an excuse to lock us in endless transition.
    Why would the EU want that?
    France wants our fish. Spain wants Gibraltar. For a start.
    Years of uncertainty and bitterness gains them those things? Isn't there a time limit in the WA? The backstop is an issue within it, but the transition as a whole seems deliberately very time limited, there's dates all over it about how x and y will come to an end.
  • FF43FF43 Posts: 10,962

    FF43 said:

    If the HoC stands firm the EU will have to choose between No Deal and No Backstop.

    Do you really think the EU would really choose No Deal? The only reason we are where we are is because the EU thought the UK wouldn't stand firm.

    Why would the EU be more frightened of No Deal than us? If you are going to call people's bluff you need to be confident they will be more terrified of the consequences than you are. "Do what you want" isn't the response you want to a threat

    Our European counterparts may be very good actors but they are giving a very good impression of supreme indifference to Britains No Deal talk, while it is certainly spooking those on our side of the English channel
    Because we gain our Leaver principles (May's old red lines) from no deal: end of ECJ law, exit Single Market, exit Customs Union.

    EU gains nothing from No Deal.

    Ireland in particular gains nothing from No Deal. It is a pure loss to them.
    You are talking about something different, which is that we might as well go for No Deal because we gain from it. (I and most people who are experts on this think you are wrong about that, but let's stick with it). The point is, it's not going to get the EU side to offer something different unless they feel more threatened than they think we are.

    Specifically Ireland loses if it agrees to drop the backstop because that legitimises a hard border, which is their key red line. No deal means no agreement to a hard border. A hard border may happen de facto and there may be other negative consequences of no deal but Ireland can take a calculated gamble that at some point the UK will want a deal of some sort with the EU, at which point the backstop can be reinstated. (Actually this will happen within days, but I am still going along with your idea that No Deal is a good deal for us). It's in Ireland's interest therefore not to drop the backstop
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 13,208
    edited December 2018
    Donny43 said:

    Donny43 said:

    Donny43 said:

    IanB2 said:

    Nah, most people would be glad that it's over; the ERG's star has crashed and burned, yes they will make a fuss but they'll be back where they started as eccentrics to whom most people won't give a hearing.
    I am not worried about the ERG. I tend to agree with you about them. I am rather more concerned about the righteous indignation of the 17.4m who voted Leave and who will know the Tory Remoaners denied them what they won at the ballot box.
    It won't be Tory Remoaners, but Tory and non-Tory Leavers in cahoots with Labour, the LibDems and the SNP who will have denied them what they won at the ballot box. If the ERG and heavy friends hadn't done a great job trashing the implementation of Brexit, it would be about to pass parliament and we'd be definitely leaving on March 29th.
    So?

    Why would a Hotel California/purgatory Brexit be worth agreeing to?
    Don't ask me, it was Brexiteers who wanted:

    - An end to the CAP
    - An end to the CFP
    - Leaving the Single Market
    - Leaving the Customs Union
    - An end to Freedom of Movement
    - An end to ECJ interference in domestic law
    - An end to paying vast sums to the EU
    - A free-trade deal with the EU
    - A smooth transition

    Now it turns out they and you don't want that. I really haven't the faintest glimmer of an idea why you and other leavers have changed your minds and in many cases are accusing the PM who has painstakingly negotiated it of something akin to treason, but what I do know is that if there's now zero reason for anyone else to respect the referendum result.
    The deal doesn't guarantee any of that as long as the EU retains a veto on moving out of transition.
    Hang on, I thought the problem was that we would be stuck in the backstop, not the transition. Make your mind up;
    The backstop is to be used as an excuse to lock us in endless transition. You'd realise that if you didn't just blindly regurgitate the leader's lines to take.
    Mate
    We've never met.
    Thankfully. Doesn't mean you're not being very silly though.
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 13,208
    kle4 said:

    Donny43 said:

    kle4 said:

    Donny43 said:

    Donny43 said:

    IanB2 said:



    Nah, most people would be glad that it's over; the ERG's star has crashed and burned, yes they will make a fuss but they'll be back where they started as eccentrics to whom most people won't give a hearing.

    I am not worried about the ERG. I tend to agree with you about them. I am rather more concerned about the righteous indignation of the 17.4m who voted Leave and who will know the Tory Remoaners denied them what they won at the ballot box.
    It won't be Tory Remoaners, but Tory and non-Tory Leavers in cahoots with Labour, the LibDems and the SNP who will have denied them what they won at the ballot box. If the ERG and heavy friends hadn't done a great job trashing the implementation of Brexit, it would be about to pass parliament and we'd be definitely leaving on March 29th.
    So?

    Why would a Hotel California/purgatory Brexit be worth agreeing to?
    Don't ask me, it was Brexiteers who wanted:

    - An end to the CAP
    - An end to the CFP
    - Leaving the Single Market
    - Leaving the Customs Union
    - An end to Freedom of Movement
    - An end to ECJ interference in domestic law
    - An end to paying vast sums to the EU
    - A free-trade deal with the EU
    - A smooth transition

    Now it turns out they and you don't want that. I really haven't the faintest glimmer of an idea why you and other leavers have changed your minds and in many cases are accusing the PM who has painstakingly negotiated it of something akin to treason, but what I do know is that if there's now zero reason for anyone else to respect the referendum result.
    The deal doesn't guarantee any of that as long as the EU retains a veto on moving out of transition.
    Hang on, I thought the problem was that we would be stuck in the backstop, not the transition. Make your mind up;
    The backstop is to be used as an excuse to lock us in endless transition.
    Why would the EU want that?
    France wants our fish. Spain wants Gibraltar. For a start.
    Years of uncertainty and bitterness gains them those things? Isn't there a time limit in the WA? The backstop is an issue within it, but the transition as a whole seems deliberately very time limited, there's dates all over it about how x and y will come to an end.
    Spot on. But most headbangers don't really want to be bothered with the facts.
  • Donny43Donny43 Posts: 634

    Donny43 said:

    The backstop is to be used as an excuse to lock us in endless transition. You'd realise that if you didn't just blindly regurgitate the leader's lines to take.

    Ah, the most idiotic of idiots' ad hominem attacks.

    So you think the EU wants the transition to go on for ever? So why did they insist on it being time-limited? And why on earth would they want the uncertainty and hassle to drag on? It's raving, frothing, bonkers nonsense.
    The EU as in the institutions? No.

    But in reality individual member states will use it in the trade talks to dissuade us from pressing our case. Macron has already made this clear, in case you weren't paying attention.

    Accepting this poison pill was a huge missed opportunity for May. Without it she'd be looking at a significant victory on Tuesday, not a possible 3 figure defeat.
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 13,208

    Scott_P said:

    I was hired by them. One has a market cap of over US$200 billion. But I enjoyed being in independents/start ups much more.

    No doubt Scott_P has also been the deal-maker that took a start up to the edge of the FTSE100 in under 5 years.

    Yeah, right....

    So, still none.

    Noted.
    Hope you don't need a big tent you have blown it!!!
    Other tent providers are available :wink:
  • The EU do not have a veto on us moving out of Transition.

    http://eulawanalysis.blogspot.com/2018/11/the-brexit-withdrawal-agreement.html

    Key question: Can the UK be forced to stay in the transition period indefinitely?

    No – and no. First of all, any extension of the transition period has to be agreed jointly, as noted already. Secondly, any extension won’t be indefinite, since the negotiators will add a final possible date for extension when they agree the final text of the withdrawal agreement.

    On the other hand, the UK might theoretically end up in the backstop relating to Northern Ireland indefinitely. Although the withdrawal agreement says that this arrangement must be temporary, unlike the transition period there is no final date to end it and the UK cannot unilaterally end it at a certain date. However, the backstop is more limited in scope than the transition period, as it concerns only some EU laws (mainly on external trade, customs, and goods regulation, plus some limited application of EU laws on labour, the environment, state aids and competition in its Annexes). In particular, the backstop does not concern the free movement of people or services, or contribution to the EU budget.

    Yes, those evil Eurocrats are plotting to lock us indefinitely in an arrangement where we get all of the advantages of the Single Market and Customs Union without having to pay the bills and without having to accept Freedom of Movement. The cunning bastards!
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453

    Lol. Like I give a shiny shit.

    Spoken like a true ace negotiator...
  • AndrewAndrew Posts: 2,894
    edited December 2018
    Donny43 said:


    The deal doesn't guarantee any of that as long as the EU retains a veto on moving out of transition.

    The WA specifies that the transition lasts till the end of 2020, with an option for a 2 year extension if both sides agree.

    That's it for the transition period. It ends then, and there is no veto.
  • Donny43Donny43 Posts: 634
    kle4 said:

    Donny43 said:

    kle4 said:

    Donny43 said:

    Donny43 said:

    IanB2 said:



    Nah, most people would be glad that it's over; the ERG's star has crashed and burned, yes they will make a fuss but they'll be back where they started as eccentrics to whom most people won't give a hearing.

    I am not worried about the ERG. I tend to agree with you about them. I am rather more concerned about the righteous indignation of the 17.4m who voted Leave and who will know the Tory Remoaners denied them what they won at the ballot box.
    It won't be Tory Remoaners, but Tory and non-Tory Leavers in cahoots with Labour, the LibDems and the SNP who will have denied them what they won at the ballot box. If the ERG and heavy friends hadn't done a great job trashing the implementation of Brexit, it would be about to pass parliament and we'd be definitely leaving on March 29th.
    So?

    Why would a Hotel California/purgatory Brexit be worth agreeing to?
    Don't ask me, it was Brexiteers who wanted:

    - An end to the CAP
    - An end to the CFP
    - Leaving the Single Market
    - Leaving the Customs Union
    - An end to Freedom of Movement
    - An end to ECJ interference in domestic law
    - An end to paying vast sums to the EU
    - A free-trade deal with the EU
    - A smooth transition

    Now it turns out they and you don't want that. I really haven't the faintest glimmer of an idea why you and other leavers have changed your minds and in many cases are accusing the PM who has painstakingly negotiated it of something akin to treason, but what I do know is that if there's now zero reason for anyone else to respect the referendum result.
    The deal doesn't guarantee any of that as long as the EU retains a veto on moving out of transition.
    Hang on, I thought the problem was that we would be stuck in the backstop, not the transition. Make your mind up;
    The backstop is to be used as an excuse to lock us in endless transition.
    Why would the EU want that?
    France wants our fish. Spain wants Gibraltar. For a start.
    Years of uncertainty and bitterness gains them those things? Isn't there a time limit in the WA? The backstop is an issue within it, but the transition as a whole seems deliberately very time limited, there's dates all over it about how x and y will come to an end.
    If there isn't a final trade deal, we're still in transition whether or not we are in Transition.
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 13,208
    edited December 2018
    Donny43 said:

    kle4 said:

    Donny43 said:

    kle4 said:

    Donny43 said:

    Donny43 said:

    IanB2 said:



    I am not worried about the ERG. I tend to agree with you about them. I am rather more concerned about the righteous indignation of the 17.4m who voted Leave and who will know the Tory Remoaners denied them what they won at the ballot box.
    It won't be Tory Remoaners, but Tory and non-Tory Leavers in cahoots with Labour, the LibDems and the SNP who will have denied them what they won at the ballot box. If the ERG and heavy friends hadn't done a great job trashing the implementation of Brexit, it would be about to pass parliament and we'd be definitely leaving on March 29th.
    So?

    Why would a Hotel California/purgatory Brexit be worth agreeing to?
    Don't ask me, it was Brexiteers who wanted:

    - An end to the CAP
    - An end to the CFP
    - Leaving the Single Market
    - Leaving the Customs Union
    - An end to Freedom of Movement
    - An end to ECJ interference in domestic law
    - An end to paying vast sums to the EU
    - A free-trade deal with the EU
    - A smooth transition

    Now it turns out they and you don't want that. I really haven't the faintest glimmer of an idea why you and other leavers have changed your minds and in many cases are accusing the PM who has painstakingly negotiated it of something akin to treason, but what I do know is that if there's now zero reason for anyone else to respect the referendum result.
    The deal doesn't guarantee any of that as long as the EU retains a veto on moving out of transition.
    Hang on, I thought the problem was that we would be stuck in the backstop, not the transition. Make your mind up;
    The backstop is to be used as an excuse to lock us in endless transition.
    Why would the EU want that?
    France wants our fish. Spain wants Gibraltar. For a start.
    Years of uncertainty and bitterness gains them those things? Isn't there a time limit in the WA? The backstop is an issue within it, but the transition as a whole seems deliberately very time limited, there's dates all over it about how x and y will come to an end.
    If there isn't a final trade deal, we're still in transition whether or not we are in Transition.
    Can you just point me to the part of the Withdrawal Agreement that says that?

    Edit: No? I thought not.
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 13,208

    The EU do not have a veto on us moving out of Transition.

    http://eulawanalysis.blogspot.com/2018/11/the-brexit-withdrawal-agreement.html

    Key question: Can the UK be forced to stay in the transition period indefinitely?

    No – and no. First of all, any extension of the transition period has to be agreed jointly, as noted already. Secondly, any extension won’t be indefinite, since the negotiators will add a final possible date for extension when they agree the final text of the withdrawal agreement.

    On the other hand, the UK might theoretically end up in the backstop relating to Northern Ireland indefinitely. Although the withdrawal agreement says that this arrangement must be temporary, unlike the transition period there is no final date to end it and the UK cannot unilaterally end it at a certain date. However, the backstop is more limited in scope than the transition period, as it concerns only some EU laws (mainly on external trade, customs, and goods regulation, plus some limited application of EU laws on labour, the environment, state aids and competition in its Annexes). In particular, the backstop does not concern the free movement of people or services, or contribution to the EU budget.

    Yes, those evil Eurocrats are plotting to lock us indefinitely in an arrangement where we get all of the advantages of the Single Market and Customs Union without having to pay the bills and without having to accept Freedom of Movement. The cunning bastards!
    Is Franz Kafka available to be next PM? He should be in his element.
  • Donny43Donny43 Posts: 634

    Donny43 said:

    kle4 said:

    Donny43 said:

    kle4 said:

    Donny43 said:

    Donny43 said:



    I am not worried about the ERG. I tend to agree with you about them. I am rather more concerned about the righteous indignation of the 17.4m who voted Leave and who will know the Tory Remoaners denied them what they won at the ballot box.

    It won't be Tory Remoaners, but Tory and non-Tory Leavers in cahoots with Labour, the LibDems and the SNP who will have denied them what they won at the ballot box. If the ERG and heavy friends hadn't done a great job trashing the implementation of Brexit, it would be about to pass parliament and we'd be definitely leaving on March 29th.
    So?

    Why would a Hotel California/purgatory Brexit be worth agreeing to?
    Don't ask me, it was Brexiteers who wanted:

    - An end to the CAP
    - An end to the CFP
    - Leaving the Single Market
    - Leaving the Customs Union
    - An end to Freedom of Movement
    - An end to ECJ interference in domestic law
    - An end to paying vast sums to the EU
    - A free-trade deal with the EU
    - A smooth transition

    Now it turns out they and you don't want that. I really haven't the faintest glimmer of an idea why you and other leavers have changed your minds and in many cases are accusing the PM who has painstakingly negotiated it of something akin to treason, but what I do know is that if there's now zero reason for anyone else to respect the referendum result.
    The deal doesn't guarantee any of that as long as the EU retains a veto on moving out of transition.
    Hang on, I thought the problem was that we would be stuck in the backstop, not the transition. Make your mind up;
    The backstop is to be used as an excuse to lock us in endless transition.
    Why would the EU want that?
    France wants our fish. Spain wants Gibraltar. For a start.
    Years of uncertainty and bitterness gains them those things? Isn't there a time limit in the WA? The backstop is an issue within it, but the transition as a whole seems deliberately very time limited, there's dates all over it about how x and y will come to an end.
    If there isn't a final trade deal, we're still in transition whether or not we are in Transition.
    Can you just point me to the part of the Withdrawal Agreement that says that?
    It's an analysis of the Withdrawal Agreement and the political declaration, not a quote from it.
  • FloaterFloater Posts: 10,933

    kle4 said:

    May has spoken with Tusk and Varadkar tonight.

    What were they talking about. I’m a celeb finale?
    They probably want the inside scoop on which person they'll be negotiating with come Wednesday once she is gone.
    Harry redknapp?
    Feck me - Harry's old dog was a bit of a wheeler dealer.

    Lets choose him.

    Can't be worse than May and Robbins.
  • grabcocquegrabcocque Posts: 4,234
    It's funny how many prime ministerial epitaphs can be written as a short phrase.

    Margaret Thatcher: Poll Tax
    John Major: Back to Basics
    Gordon Brown:Bail Out

    But the most powerful epitaphs are the ones where all your years of failure can be pithily captured in a single word.

    Tony Blair: Iraq
    David Cameron: Referendum
    Theresa May: Backstop
This discussion has been closed.