|
In order to ensure that this thread meets TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we ask that everyone please adhere to this mod note. Posts containing only Tweets or articles adds nothing to the discussions. Therefore, when providing a source, explain why you feel it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion. Also take note that unsubstantiated tweets/posts meant only to rekindle old arguments will be actioned upon. All in all, please continue to enjoy posting in TL General and partake in discussions as much as you want! But please be respectful when posting or replying to someone. There is a clear difference between constructive criticism/discussion and just plain being rude and insulting. https://www.registertovote.service.gov.uk |
EM Drive all over again.
I'd like to go on record and make clear that while i despise the stupidity of the majority of brexiters (we'll get all the deals, WTO rules best thing ever, for the queen!), this attitude is as stupid.
No. What Corbyn asked for to back Mays deal is unrealistic. He might as well have asked for a guarantee for a cold fusion reactor by the end of the year.
First, and that seems to be part of your problem, the EU will not agree on anything he asked for (especially not the part where he asks for a say in EU trade questions). And make no mistakes, these demands are not decided on by May, but by the EU.
Your problem is that you live in Lala-Land. It's right next to Brexit Empire on the map. You assume that the EU will shit on its own rules to accommodate the UK. Which is an extremely moronic thing to do, that's not how politics work. People like you argue that "yeah but it's also in the EUs interest to get a deal with the UK" - and that's right. But what you conveniently like to leave out is that the UK isn't special. Whatever the EU gives in concessions to the UK, they'd have to do with other countries too - and that's where the rats tail starts.
They have lines. They made them vastly clear, if by now you haven't understand that they will not, under no circumstance, budge on these lines, you need to wake up or shut up. There's either free movement, or there isn't. There's no "a little free movement". That doesn't exist, and btw, it can't exist either because that literally would spell the end of the EU.
That's what i mean by Realpolitik. Not wishful thinking that's based on shit for which there's zero indication it would work. Not once, not in the slightest, has the EU budged on the principles the EU is built on. To now argue that because Corbyn suggested it, it could work, if... is as dangerous as the "NO DEAL OLOL OGOG" of brexiters. It's wasting time.
That's something the UK doesn't have anymore. If anything, and here's the actual real problem, Corbyn should be be publicly condemned for these demands, because they, for all intents and purposes, make sure that you will have a no-deal brexit.
Sure, the EU might throw you a bone and call it "an advisory role on future trade talks", which basically would mean jack - but even then, this entire show is a clusterfuck. In case nobody has noticed, he's the leader of the opposition. There's not much "opposing" here, which leaves 48% of the country (back at vote day) without political representation. Not because it's "Labours stance" but his stance.
He's not doing his job, he's an opportunistic crooked politician just like any other (albeit for different reasons i suppose), i said it before and i again expect plenty of flak for it. He's not doing anything to indeed prevent the catastrophe that's looming not far away - he indeed facilitates it.
edit: i btw apologise if i sound like an ass, too.
|
On February 10 2019 06:14 m4ini wrote:+ Show Spoiler +EM Drive all over again.
I'd like to go on record and make clear that while i despise the stupidity of the majority of brexiters (we'll get all the deals, WTO rules best thing ever, for the queen!), this attitude is as stupid.
No. What Corbyn asked for to back Mays deal is unrealistic. He might as well have asked for a guarantee for a cold fusion reactor by the end of the year.
First, and that seems to be part of your problem, the EU will not agree on anything he asked for (especially not the part where he asks for a say in EU trade questions). And make no mistakes, these demands are not decided on by May, but by the EU.
Your problem is that you live in Lala-Land. It's right next to Brexit Empire on the map. You assume that the EU will shit on its own rules to accommodate the UK. Which is an extremely moronic thing to do, that's not how politics work. People like you argue that "yeah but it's also in the EUs interest to get a deal with the UK" - and that's right. But what you conveniently like to leave out is that the UK isn't special. Whatever the EU gives in concessions to the UK, they'd have to do with other countries too - and that's where the rats tail starts.
They have lines. They made them vastly clear, if by now you haven't understand that they will not, under no circumstance, budge on these lines, you need to wake up or shut up. There's either free movement, or there isn't. There's no "a little free movement". That doesn't exist, and btw, it can't exist either because that literally would spell the end of the EU.
That's what i mean by Realpolitik. Not wishful thinking that's based on shit for which there's zero indication it would work. Not once, not in the slightest, has the EU budged on the principles the EU is built on. To now argue that because Corbyn suggested it, it could work, if... is as dangerous as the "NO DEAL OLOL OGOG" of brexiters. It's wasting time.
That's something the UK doesn't have anymore. If anything, and here's the actual real problem, Corbyn should be be publicly condemned for these demands, because they, for all intents and purposes, make sure that you will have a no-deal brexit.
Sure, the EU might throw you a bone and call it "an advisory role on future trade talks", which basically would mean jack - but even then, this entire show is a clusterfuck. In case nobody has noticed, he's the leader of the opposition. There's not much "opposing" here, which leaves 48% of the country (back at vote day) without political representation. Not because it's "Labours stance" but his stance.
He's not doing his job, he's an opportunistic crooked politician just like any other (albeit for different reasons i suppose), i said it before and i again expect plenty of flak for it. He's not doing anything to indeed prevent the catastrophe that's looming not far away - he indeed facilitates it.
edit: i btw apologise if i sound like an ass, too.
That's perfectly fine, you're entitled to your opinion. However, on this topic I rate the words Tusk, Varadkar and Verhofstadt higher than yours. I could of course be wrong but I do not think they are out to waste anyones time right now. Time will tell!
|
On February 10 2019 05:10 Longshank wrote:Show nested quote +On February 10 2019 03:33 Dangermousecatdog wrote:On February 10 2019 01:34 Longshank wrote:On February 10 2019 01:20 Gorsameth wrote:On February 10 2019 00:54 Longshank wrote:On February 09 2019 23:36 Gorsameth wrote:On February 09 2019 22:54 Longshank wrote:On February 09 2019 22:26 Gorsameth wrote:On February 09 2019 22:07 Longshank wrote:On February 09 2019 20:56 Sent. wrote:I think Tusk bringing up Corbyn's proposal at a meeting with May and his tweet about the special place in hell make it clear the EU is done negotiating with someone who has no solid backing of their parliament. Neither side takes Corbyn's stunt seriously. There's no time to reopen the negotiations. The British parliament seems to be unaware of that, but "Take the deal", "Leave with no deal" and "Cancel Brexit" are their only options and that's not going to change. Corbyn's proposal is not to reopen the negotiations but to focus of the future relationship. The backstop would remain but a permanent customs union would guarantee that it never comes in effect. The WA would be left untouched but with addendums to the political declaration. Yeah.... your aware Brexit happens in 7 weeks right? And now Corbyn comes forward he wants to negotiate an entire new permanent customs union that would eliminate the need for any border between the UK and EU. A process that normally takes years, in under 7 weeks? Yeah, I wonder why I am sceptical of that possibility, even if I ignore what or not such a deal can even exist at its base level. No, it would need to be ironed out by December 2020. Seriously, stop arguing with such conviction when you evidently don't understand the basic concepts of Brexit. Sorry for being an ass. https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-42906950 They would have until December 2020 to negotiate a customs union, which avoids the backstop kicking in, under the Withdrawal agreement. The Withdrawal agreement that the UK parliament rejected in January! Without the withdrawal agreement the UK doesn't have until December 2020, it has until march 29th to come up with something. That's correct. So your agreeing that Corbyn's proposal is useless because there is no time and he is unwilling to sign the agreement that would give more time? What? No, there's plenty(sort of) of time. All he has to do is get May's deal through Parliament. That's what he's saying to May in the letter, 'remove some of your red lines for future relationship and Labour will support your deal'. This could be damaging to both parties but it's possible there would be a cross-party majority in the middle supporting it as a last resort. What red lines has Corbyn proposed to remove? Have you actually read the letter? This is the letter for reference: https://www.scribd.com/document/399055327/Letter-to-PM-06-February-2019-1 Why do you ask what red lines Corbyn proposed to remove if you've read the letter yourself? It right there black on white. but staying in a customs union for one, if you were actually looking for an answer. As for workers rights hasn't she caved in on that one already? edit: I fully recognize that what he's proposing is close to a BINO and that it would be better in almost every way to remain. Problem is that neither remaining nor second referendum seem to be able to get a majority in Parliament, much probably thanks to Corbyn himself.
Did you read May's proposed withdrawl agreement deal that was put to the commons and defeated? You didn't. To be fair, it's something like 599 pages long. It proposed to put UK essentially in the Custom Union till 2020 and probably after that indefinitely.
But you know what's an actual red line? To propose to May to propose to the EU, to stay in the customs market, yet outside the single market and have a say in EU trade deals. Now that's a red line the EU wouldn't cross, and who can blame them? You seem to have no awareness that it takes 2 entities to strike a deal, not 1 entity to demand and the other to accept.
|
On February 10 2019 08:30 Dangermousecatdog wrote:Show nested quote +On February 10 2019 05:10 Longshank wrote:On February 10 2019 03:33 Dangermousecatdog wrote:On February 10 2019 01:34 Longshank wrote:On February 10 2019 01:20 Gorsameth wrote:On February 10 2019 00:54 Longshank wrote:On February 09 2019 23:36 Gorsameth wrote:On February 09 2019 22:54 Longshank wrote:On February 09 2019 22:26 Gorsameth wrote:On February 09 2019 22:07 Longshank wrote:
[quote]
Corbyn's proposal is not to reopen the negotiations but to focus of the future relationship. The backstop would remain but a permanent customs union would guarantee that it never comes in effect. The WA would be left untouched but with addendums to the political declaration. Yeah.... your aware Brexit happens in 7 weeks right? And now Corbyn comes forward he wants to negotiate an entire new permanent customs union that would eliminate the need for any border between the UK and EU. A process that normally takes years, in under 7 weeks? Yeah, I wonder why I am sceptical of that possibility, even if I ignore what or not such a deal can even exist at its base level. No, it would need to be ironed out by December 2020. Seriously, stop arguing with such conviction when you evidently don't understand the basic concepts of Brexit. Sorry for being an ass. https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-42906950 They would have until December 2020 to negotiate a customs union, which avoids the backstop kicking in, under the Withdrawal agreement. The Withdrawal agreement that the UK parliament rejected in January! Without the withdrawal agreement the UK doesn't have until December 2020, it has until march 29th to come up with something. That's correct. So your agreeing that Corbyn's proposal is useless because there is no time and he is unwilling to sign the agreement that would give more time? What? No, there's plenty(sort of) of time. All he has to do is get May's deal through Parliament. That's what he's saying to May in the letter, 'remove some of your red lines for future relationship and Labour will support your deal'. This could be damaging to both parties but it's possible there would be a cross-party majority in the middle supporting it as a last resort. What red lines has Corbyn proposed to remove? Have you actually read the letter? This is the letter for reference: https://www.scribd.com/document/399055327/Letter-to-PM-06-February-2019-1 Why do you ask what red lines Corbyn proposed to remove if you've read the letter yourself? It right there black on white. but staying in a customs union for one, if you were actually looking for an answer. As for workers rights hasn't she caved in on that one already? edit: I fully recognize that what he's proposing is close to a BINO and that it would be better in almost every way to remain. Problem is that neither remaining nor second referendum seem to be able to get a majority in Parliament, much probably thanks to Corbyn himself. Did you read May's proposed withdrawl agreement deal that was put to the commons and defeated? You didn't. To be fair, it's something like 599 pages long. It proposed to put UK essentially in the Custom Union till 2020 and probably after that indefinitely. But you know what's an actual red line? To propose to May to propose to the EU, to stay in the customs market, yet outside the single market and have a say in EU trade deals. Now that's a red line the EU wouldn't cross, and who can blame them? You seem to have no awareness that it takes 2 entities to strike a deal, not 1 entity to demand and the other to accept.
If you are uncertain of May's red lines you can read about them here and here.
|
If just scrapping Brexit completely to end this mess was put up for a vote, how would it go?
|
On February 10 2019 21:17 Slydie wrote:
If just scrapping Brexit completely to end this mess was put up for a vote, how would it go?
It would be refused and everyone would be detailing his great cherry picked super deal, which should have been implemented.
And even if you somehow brain hack all the MPs for this vote, rest assured that in a year, half of them would again be babbling about leaving the EU if they don't get any concessions, and how this would make the UK great again.
|
|
|
On February 10 2019 15:18 Longshank wrote:Show nested quote +On February 10 2019 08:30 Dangermousecatdog wrote:On February 10 2019 05:10 Longshank wrote:On February 10 2019 03:33 Dangermousecatdog wrote:On February 10 2019 01:34 Longshank wrote:On February 10 2019 01:20 Gorsameth wrote:On February 10 2019 00:54 Longshank wrote:On February 09 2019 23:36 Gorsameth wrote:On February 09 2019 22:54 Longshank wrote:On February 09 2019 22:26 Gorsameth wrote:
[quote]Yeah.... your aware Brexit happens in 7 weeks right?
And now Corbyn comes forward he wants to negotiate an entire new permanent customs union that would eliminate the need for any border between the UK and EU.
A process that normally takes years, in under 7 weeks?
Yeah, I wonder why I am sceptical of that possibility, even if I ignore what or not such a deal can even exist at its base level. No, it would need to be ironed out by December 2020. Seriously, stop arguing with such conviction when you evidently don't understand the basic concepts of Brexit. Sorry for being an ass. https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-42906950 They would have until December 2020 to negotiate a customs union, which avoids the backstop kicking in, under the Withdrawal agreement. The Withdrawal agreement that the UK parliament rejected in January! Without the withdrawal agreement the UK doesn't have until December 2020, it has until march 29th to come up with something. That's correct. So your agreeing that Corbyn's proposal is useless because there is no time and he is unwilling to sign the agreement that would give more time? What? No, there's plenty(sort of) of time. All he has to do is get May's deal through Parliament. That's what he's saying to May in the letter, 'remove some of your red lines for future relationship and Labour will support your deal'. This could be damaging to both parties but it's possible there would be a cross-party majority in the middle supporting it as a last resort. What red lines has Corbyn proposed to remove? Have you actually read the letter? This is the letter for reference: https://www.scribd.com/document/399055327/Letter-to-PM-06-February-2019-1 Why do you ask what red lines Corbyn proposed to remove if you've read the letter yourself? It right there black on white. but staying in a customs union for one, if you were actually looking for an answer. As for workers rights hasn't she caved in on that one already? edit: I fully recognize that what he's proposing is close to a BINO and that it would be better in almost every way to remain. Problem is that neither remaining nor second referendum seem to be able to get a majority in Parliament, much probably thanks to Corbyn himself. Did you read May's proposed withdrawl agreement deal that was put to the commons and defeated? You didn't. To be fair, it's something like 599 pages long. It proposed to put UK essentially in the Custom Union till 2020 and probably after that indefinitely. But you know what's an actual red line? To propose to May to propose to the EU, to stay in the customs market, yet outside the single market and have a say in EU trade deals. Now that's a red line the EU wouldn't cross, and who can blame them? You seem to have no awareness that it takes 2 entities to strike a deal, not 1 entity to demand and the other to accept. If you are uncertain of May's red lines you can read about them here and here. Wow aren't you lazy. Just google and paste links. So...what are May's red lines?
The first link doesn't make any mention of redlines and has typos in the article (hey it is the express!), and the second has immigration as a redline, which in Corbyn's letter doesn't mention anyways and the article doesn't mention what that redline actually is placed.
Neither mentions anything you have mentioned as a red line, but then again you haven't mentioned what May's line are either. So tell me lazy link posting Longshanks who doesn't read the links he posts, what are May's red lines?
_____________
On February 10 2019 21:17 Slydie wrote:
If just scrapping Brexit completely to end this mess was put up for a vote, how would it go?
Most pollsters have remain winning over leave by a higher degree than leave won the referendum for at least a year now. Which explains, why The Conservative party are trying to shift the blame to May for Brexit. It can no longer be called a vote winning issue.
|
|
|
May's red line is "Brexit is Brexit" which Corbyn's idea crosses because he wants as close to remain as you can be without actually cancelling article 50.
|
"Brexit means brexit" is about a red line as a exploding can of red paint. If May said the red line was to leave the single market, that would be a red line, that can be up specifically taken away for negotiation. But she didn't.
In fact I remember 2 years ago, that no one could figure out what this phrase she was repeating ad infinitum actually meant. Of course we now know that she was planning for another general election and she was sloganeering. It's about as red line as "strong and stable".
|
On February 11 2019 01:20 Dangermousecatdog wrote:Show nested quote +On February 10 2019 15:18 Longshank wrote:On February 10 2019 08:30 Dangermousecatdog wrote:On February 10 2019 05:10 Longshank wrote:On February 10 2019 03:33 Dangermousecatdog wrote:On February 10 2019 01:34 Longshank wrote:On February 10 2019 01:20 Gorsameth wrote:On February 10 2019 00:54 Longshank wrote:On February 09 2019 23:36 Gorsameth wrote:On February 09 2019 22:54 Longshank wrote:[quote] No, it would need to be ironed out by December 2020. Seriously, stop arguing with such conviction when you evidently don't understand the basic concepts of Brexit. Sorry for being an ass. https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-42906950 They would have until December 2020 to negotiate a customs union, which avoids the backstop kicking in, under the Withdrawal agreement. The Withdrawal agreement that the UK parliament rejected in January! Without the withdrawal agreement the UK doesn't have until December 2020, it has until march 29th to come up with something. That's correct. So your agreeing that Corbyn's proposal is useless because there is no time and he is unwilling to sign the agreement that would give more time? What? No, there's plenty(sort of) of time. All he has to do is get May's deal through Parliament. That's what he's saying to May in the letter, 'remove some of your red lines for future relationship and Labour will support your deal'. This could be damaging to both parties but it's possible there would be a cross-party majority in the middle supporting it as a last resort. What red lines has Corbyn proposed to remove? Have you actually read the letter? This is the letter for reference: https://www.scribd.com/document/399055327/Letter-to-PM-06-February-2019-1 Why do you ask what red lines Corbyn proposed to remove if you've read the letter yourself? It right there black on white. but staying in a customs union for one, if you were actually looking for an answer. As for workers rights hasn't she caved in on that one already? edit: I fully recognize that what he's proposing is close to a BINO and that it would be better in almost every way to remain. Problem is that neither remaining nor second referendum seem to be able to get a majority in Parliament, much probably thanks to Corbyn himself. Did you read May's proposed withdrawl agreement deal that was put to the commons and defeated? You didn't. To be fair, it's something like 599 pages long. It proposed to put UK essentially in the Custom Union till 2020 and probably after that indefinitely. But you know what's an actual red line? To propose to May to propose to the EU, to stay in the customs market, yet outside the single market and have a say in EU trade deals. Now that's a red line the EU wouldn't cross, and who can blame them? You seem to have no awareness that it takes 2 entities to strike a deal, not 1 entity to demand and the other to accept. If you are uncertain of May's red lines you can read about them here and here. Wow aren't you lazy. Just google and paste links. So...what are May's red lines? The first link doesn't make any mention of redlines and has typos in the article (hey it is the express!), and the second has immigration as a redline, which in Corbyn's letter doesn't mention anyways and the article doesn't mention what that redline actually is placed. Neither mentions anything you have mentioned as a red line, but then again you haven't mentioned what May's line are either. So tell me lazy link posting Longshanks who doesn't read the links he posts, what are May's red lines?
You seem upset and I got this feeling that you don't really care for an answer but her red lines aren't actual physical red lines on a wall in no10(I think!). What widely is referred to as her red lines, as in Corbyn's letter or in debates in Parliament, are the positions she's taken in her negotiations with the EU. Positions she has not been willing to move from. One such relevant example, due to the letter, is that she has ruled out a customs union on the basis that it would be incompatible with an independent trade policy. Another one is no membership of the single market since that would require free movement of people and the UK would have to answer to the European Court of Justice.
Happy to oblige!
|
Russian Federation421 Posts
On February 09 2019 20:08 Longshank wrote:Show nested quote +On February 09 2019 19:14 Gorsameth wrote:On February 09 2019 15:42 Longshank wrote:On February 09 2019 14:02 Razyda wrote:On February 08 2019 00:42 Longshank wrote:On February 07 2019 22:17 Gorsameth wrote:On February 07 2019 21:45 Longshank wrote:On February 07 2019 21:12 Gorsameth wrote:
As other said it sounds like not leaving at all to me except for 1 line.
"Dynamic alignment on rights and protections".
So I will, yet again, say it. There will not be a compromise on the 4 freedoms.
The EU will not accept "Dynamic" alignment and Corbyn knows it. Its all or nothing and the UK is currently voting for Nothing. Can you outline what 'Dynamic alignment' means? Who knows, that's the wonder of Corbyn's statement, vague enough to mean whatever he wants. But lets go with the Cambridge dictionary which says its "Full of energy/idea's" or "Changing". The first definition imo doesn't fit here so lets go with Changing. "Changing alignment on rights and protections". Again, nice and vague to mean anything. But we know what Brexit was about, ending the free movement of people into the UK and a return of sovereignty. So I don't think its a stretch to mean taking on some rights and protections from the EU while ignoring others. Which, the EU has been every clear about, is a no deal situation. You take it all or you get none of it. On February 07 2019 21:20 Sent. wrote:
If the four freedoms were absolutely non-negotiable, there would be no long transitional periods for countries that joined the EU in 2004. The restrictions of freedom of movement ended in 2011. Because transition periods are something different from only taking on some parts of the 4 freedoms and downright denying others. Like the UK's idea of access to the free transfer of goods and services without the free movement of people, not just for a transitional period but as a permanent deal. The EU has been more then clear on this. He's said in the past that there will have to be movement of people, even if he didn't want to call it free. It's not outside the realm of possibility that there could be some level of access to the single market in exchange for some level of freedom of movement, even if it would be difficult to negotiate How is this still a thing?? Dunno, the EU seems to think it's something worth discussing at least. Where have you been getting this idea from? The EU has repeatedly said no to it, has said there is no major renegotiation possible on the current deal and talks this week had no result. Well yes, but it's not the current deal we're talking about. I guess we'll have to wait for clarification on the 'dynamic alignment' bit. Whatever it is, the EU have made pretty clear they're eager to discuss it.
As an outsider, I am most baffled that the British side (or at least public) mistakes politeness and diplomatic language for willingness to negotiate. What EU is eager to discuss is not some partial access to four freedoms, it is which red lines May is willing to drop to comply with EU red lines since her previous deal isn’t getting through the Parliament. The deal is not to be renegotiated unless the UK accepts freedom of movement or compliance with EU standards.
|
This guardian article talks about a new cross-party amendment to the EU withdrawal bill.
Labour and some tory mps agree to conditionally pass May's deal. The condition is that a people's vote will be held afterwards with the options to either take May's deal and leave or to remain in the EU.
I don't have high hopes this will fly but it would let parliament off the hook so who knows. The no-deal brexiters will be unhappy though. On the other hand whatever the resolution of this mess: Some people will be unhappy.
|
On February 11 2019 06:12 Banaora wrote:This guardian article talks about a new cross-party amendment to the EU withdrawal bill. Labour and some tory mps agree to conditionally pass May's deal. The condition is that a people's vote will be held afterwards with the options to either take May's deal and leave or to remain in the EU. I don't have high hopes this will fly but it would let parliament off the hook so who knows. The no-deal brexiters will be unhappy though. On the other hand whatever the resolution of this mess: Some people will be unhappy.
Given that this move will further drag out discussions and postpone a real decision I am confident that this will be the most likely outcome.
|
On February 11 2019 04:31 Longshank wrote:Show nested quote +On February 11 2019 01:20 Dangermousecatdog wrote:On February 10 2019 15:18 Longshank wrote:On February 10 2019 08:30 Dangermousecatdog wrote:On February 10 2019 05:10 Longshank wrote:On February 10 2019 03:33 Dangermousecatdog wrote:On February 10 2019 01:34 Longshank wrote:On February 10 2019 01:20 Gorsameth wrote:On February 10 2019 00:54 Longshank wrote:On February 09 2019 23:36 Gorsameth wrote:
[quote]They would have until December 2020 to negotiate a customs union, which avoids the backstop kicking in, under the Withdrawal agreement.
The Withdrawal agreement that the UK parliament rejected in January!
Without the withdrawal agreement the UK doesn't have until December 2020, it has until march 29th to come up with something. That's correct. So your agreeing that Corbyn's proposal is useless because there is no time and he is unwilling to sign the agreement that would give more time? What? No, there's plenty(sort of) of time. All he has to do is get May's deal through Parliament. That's what he's saying to May in the letter, 'remove some of your red lines for future relationship and Labour will support your deal'. This could be damaging to both parties but it's possible there would be a cross-party majority in the middle supporting it as a last resort. What red lines has Corbyn proposed to remove? Have you actually read the letter? This is the letter for reference: https://www.scribd.com/document/399055327/Letter-to-PM-06-February-2019-1 Why do you ask what red lines Corbyn proposed to remove if you've read the letter yourself? It right there black on white. but staying in a customs union for one, if you were actually looking for an answer. As for workers rights hasn't she caved in on that one already? edit: I fully recognize that what he's proposing is close to a BINO and that it would be better in almost every way to remain. Problem is that neither remaining nor second referendum seem to be able to get a majority in Parliament, much probably thanks to Corbyn himself. Did you read May's proposed withdrawl agreement deal that was put to the commons and defeated? You didn't. To be fair, it's something like 599 pages long. It proposed to put UK essentially in the Custom Union till 2020 and probably after that indefinitely. But you know what's an actual red line? To propose to May to propose to the EU, to stay in the customs market, yet outside the single market and have a say in EU trade deals. Now that's a red line the EU wouldn't cross, and who can blame them? You seem to have no awareness that it takes 2 entities to strike a deal, not 1 entity to demand and the other to accept. If you are uncertain of May's red lines you can read about them here and here. Wow aren't you lazy. Just google and paste links. So...what are May's red lines? The first link doesn't make any mention of redlines and has typos in the article (hey it is the express!), and the second has immigration as a redline, which in Corbyn's letter doesn't mention anyways and the article doesn't mention what that redline actually is placed. Neither mentions anything you have mentioned as a red line, but then again you haven't mentioned what May's line are either. So tell me lazy link posting Longshanks who doesn't read the links he posts, what are May's red lines? You seem upset and I got this feeling that you don't really care for an answer but her red lines aren't actual physical red lines on a wall in no10(I think!). What widely is referred to as her red lines, as in Corbyn's letter or in debates in Parliament, are the positions she's taken in her negotiations with the EU. Positions she has not been willing to move from. One such relevant example, due to the letter, is that she has ruled out a customs union on the basis that it would be incompatible with an independent trade policy. Another one is no membership of the single market since that would require free movement of people and the UK would have to answer to the European Court of Justice. Happy to oblige!
Ignoring that you actually haven't answered the question directly, I'm happy that you answer the question of what are her red lines with... "are the positions she's taken in her negotiations with the EU"
Wow. Seems you are clueless as to what red lines May has. It's understandable, since she actually hasn't gone out to say what her red lines actually are, or if she has any, but it's nice to know that you can read her mind. Not as in analysing decisions but actually read her mind.
On February 11 2019 06:12 Banaora wrote:This guardian article talks about a new cross-party amendment to the EU withdrawal bill. Labour and some tory mps agree to conditionally pass May's deal. The condition is that a people's vote will be held afterwards with the options to either take May's deal and leave or to remain in the EU. I don't have high hopes this will fly but it would let parliament off the hook so who knows. The no-deal brexiters will be unhappy though. On the other hand whatever the resolution of this mess: Some people will be unhappy. I don't have high hopes either. All the leavers will be against it and May most likely be against it for the sake of preserving the Conservative party's ability to win elections. Still one can hope.
|
From what I can gather, May refused to budge on her red lines and rejected Corbyn's offer late last night. Oh well, 'twas fun while it lasted. It will be interesting to see where he'll go from here, if he'll finally support a second referendum. What other options does he have left?
|
Northern Ireland22213 Posts
Interesting "rumour" here
I am told @Keir_Starmer is not the happiest member of the frontbench. According to multiple sources, he had agreed that the final part of Corbyn’s letter to May would say “if you do not accept this [Brexit offer] there will be a People’s Vote”. One source tells me “LOTO [the leader of the opposition] agreed to this. But then Keir discovered after the letter had been sent and published that the People’s Vote para had gone”. Starmer “called LOTO and was told ‘oh we must have forgotten that paragraph’”. Apparently Starmer’s reaction has not been one of unbridled joy. And even erstwhile Corbyn loyalists are becoming grumpy at what they see as his refusal to follow the revealed will of Labour members and supporters that their should be a referendum. One said: “the only interest” of Corbyn and his aides is “seeing a Tory Brexit through so they can wash their hands of it”.
Pretty much confirms what I always thought, that JC doesn't care if we leave with no deal, he's just interested in playing politics.
|
On February 11 2019 20:47 ahswtini wrote:Interesting "rumour" here https://twitter.com/peston/status/1094912356864409605Show nested quote +I am told @Keir_Starmer is not the happiest member of the frontbench. According to multiple sources, he had agreed that the final part of Corbyn’s letter to May would say “if you do not accept this [Brexit offer] there will be a People’s Vote”. One source tells me “LOTO [the leader of the opposition] agreed to this. But then Keir discovered after the letter had been sent and published that the People’s Vote para had gone”. Starmer “called LOTO and was told ‘oh we must have forgotten that paragraph’”. Apparently Starmer’s reaction has not been one of unbridled joy. And even erstwhile Corbyn loyalists are becoming grumpy at what they see as his refusal to follow the revealed will of Labour members and supporters that their should be a referendum. One said: “the only interest” of Corbyn and his aides is “seeing a Tory Brexit through so they can wash their hands of it”. Pretty much confirms what I always thought, that JC doesn't care if we leave with no deal, he's just interested in playing politics.
No, he isn't, and it confuses me that people think Corbyn is 'being a politician' by doing something manifestly bad for him.
He's never liked the EU, ever, and he's a brexiteer. This should have been obvious for years but somehow people are only now catching on. He wants to leave and doesn't care about the details especially. He cares about fixing the UK, and has his own ideas for how that can be accomplished. The EU doesn't really factor in there, though he likes some things the EU does.
|
United States44321 Posts
On February 14 2019 08:33 iamthedave wrote:Show nested quote +On February 11 2019 20:47 ahswtini wrote:Interesting "rumour" here https://twitter.com/peston/status/1094912356864409605I am told @Keir_Starmer is not the happiest member of the frontbench. According to multiple sources, he had agreed that the final part of Corbyn’s letter to May would say “if you do not accept this [Brexit offer] there will be a People’s Vote”. One source tells me “LOTO [the leader of the opposition] agreed to this. But then Keir discovered after the letter had been sent and published that the People’s Vote para had gone”. Starmer “called LOTO and was told ‘oh we must have forgotten that paragraph’”. Apparently Starmer’s reaction has not been one of unbridled joy. And even erstwhile Corbyn loyalists are becoming grumpy at what they see as his refusal to follow the revealed will of Labour members and supporters that their should be a referendum. One said: “the only interest” of Corbyn and his aides is “seeing a Tory Brexit through so they can wash their hands of it”. Pretty much confirms what I always thought, that JC doesn't care if we leave with no deal, he's just interested in playing politics. No, he isn't, and it confuses me that people think Corbyn is 'being a politician' by doing something manifestly bad for him. He's never liked the EU, ever, and he's a brexiteer. This should have been obvious for years but somehow people are only now catching on. He wants to leave and doesn't care about the details especially. He cares about fixing the UK, and has his own ideas for how that can be accomplished. The EU doesn't really factor in there, though he likes some things the EU does.
He’s fucking the UK by not participating in the Brexit process beyond “I don’t like your plan”.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
