EPTUK Politics Mega-thread - Page 489
| Forum Index > General Forum |
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 | ||
|
Excludos
Norway8111 Posts
| ||
|
m4ini
4215 Posts
On March 14 2019 18:36 iPlaY.NettleS wrote: They want a second referendum. Like i said before the EU cannot allow the UK to actually leave because the EU exports far more to the UK than vice versa so any type of tough bargain would hurt the EU.Any type of favourable economic exit deal makes leaving more viable for other EU nations so they can't have that either.With Germany barely avoiding recession a couple weeks back - last 1/4 GDP print 0.0 with a negative the quarter before.Italy already back in recession now of course. So it's like Lisbon Treaty in Ireland a decade ago.Keep voting until you give the EU the outcome they want. Riots will start up soon. That's of course only if you ignore literally everything that happened the last two years. Some next level intelligence by the resident edgelord on display here. | ||
|
Simberto
Germany11547 Posts
But at this point, it is clear that the amazing trade deals aren't manifesting, the amazing exit deal isn't manifesting either, and the UK leadership has no idea what to do, because none of the options that actually exist can find a majority. | ||
|
Artisreal
Germany9235 Posts
| ||
|
Velr
Switzerland10757 Posts
| ||
Pandemona
Charlie Sheens House51490 Posts
On March 14 2019 20:06 Simberto wrote: Indeed. I think it has become very clear at this point that the UK needs the EU far more than the EU needs the UK. Sure, it would probably be best for everyone if they didn't leave, because that was a really silly idea to begin with. But at this point, it is clear that the amazing trade deals aren't manifesting, the amazing exit deal isn't manifesting either, and the UK leadership has no idea what to do, because none of the options that actually exist can find a majority. What it is not clear at all the UK needs the EU far more than vice versa. That is a ludicrous statement to make. I am all for May's deal i think it is best for everyone, Labour think they can magic up a deal that is better with citing a customs union aspect which the EU will not give into without a payment. Which has been made abundtly clear throughout negotiations. The MAIN problem the Government have right now is NO ONE, minus May it seems, wants to make a decision at all. Labour and all the others just continually ask for things they know is impossible and cite that as reasoning for change. Whilst the rest of the silly people want THE PUBLIC to make ANOTHER decision FOR THEM. They get paid £80,000 a year, expenses on top plus they are VOTED to represent their "people" and still, they cannot make a decision and us, the sheep, the ones without any idea of politics or what this actually means as a whole (due to everyone lying on every side) to make it for them. Great! As they said btw in relation to Germany in your claim UK needs the EU more...the car industry will have to put up 10% on all German cars that come into the UK, meaning that said cars will no longer be bought as Japanese cars are imported without any tax breaks anyway...Hyundai will also follow suit from South Korea unless the "EU Stop Them" which somehow they can? So yeah German car manufactures about to lose a lot of sales and the UK lose out on a few cars? Jobs go a little, not all as there will still be the rich able to afford a BMW if the want, but the average family now drives around in a freaking Nissan Juke! | ||
|
Pandemona
Charlie Sheens House51490 Posts
On March 14 2019 05:48 Zaros wrote: May plan for meaningful vote 3 next week trying to get brexiteers back on side now parliament will vote to extend, but i suspect this attempt will fail because she isnt sacking remainers who voted against the government. Election is coming soon the government is falling apart. Remember that the extension made will just be until June 30th before the MEP votes which is the latest possible extension that the EU will allow, which they will i think as they will make sure a decision happens then, plain and simple. May's deal will pass in that time as there will be no other choice. The second referendum vote will go to commons and it will be veto'd by all of conservatives basically. | ||
|
Excludos
Norway8111 Posts
On March 14 2019 20:09 Velr wrote: Best for the EU would be for Britain to leave and maybe come back in ~10 years, but whiteout all the privileges Britain has at the moment. For EU it would be best to put Britain in EEA, which is practically the same as being a member except the representation. It's also not far from what most politicians in the UK wants, but that require open borders from EU countries which is no bueno | ||
|
Jockmcplop
United Kingdom9674 Posts
On March 14 2019 21:09 Pandemona wrote: Remember that the extension made will just be until June 30th before the MEP votes which is the latest possible extension that the EU will allow, which they will i think as they will make sure a decision happens then, plain and simple. May's deal will pass in that time as there will be no other choice. The second referendum vote will go to commons and it will be veto'd by all of conservatives basically. I can't see the tweet but the bolded comment is currently in dispute. Barnier (I think) came out today in favour of a long delay to Brexit to allow the UK to plan a new strategy. Personally, if it wouldn't inevitably get amended to shit by Labour, I'd like a simple vote put to Parliament: a) May's Deal b) No Brexit Simple. Either we Brexit or we don't. Enough fucking around. May's deal is shit but Brexit was already going to be shit and there's no avoiding that. Just get on with it. | ||
|
Pandemona
Charlie Sheens House51490 Posts
But yes it seems in the country what you say is what should happen. For fuck sake make a decision you waste of space politicians. | ||
|
Gorsameth
Netherlands21761 Posts
On March 14 2019 21:09 Pandemona wrote: "Surely May's deal will pass next time because there is no other choice"Remember that the extension made will just be until June 30th before the MEP votes which is the latest possible extension that the EU will allow, which they will i think as they will make sure a decision happens then, plain and simple. May's deal will pass in that time as there will be no other choice. The second referendum vote will go to commons and it will be veto'd by all of conservatives basically. There was no other choice last Tuesday. There was no other choice in January. Nothing is going to change by extending it a week, a month or 3 months. | ||
|
Pandemona
Charlie Sheens House51490 Posts
They "voted" for a Brexit without no deal the government, if the only deal they can get is the one on the table then what because the EU already said it will NOT NEGOTIATE anymore, 2nd time was more than enough. So there will be nothing to change as no way labour can get this customs trade union fairtyle he wants as it does not exist which he has been told numerous times. So all that will happen is, the extension will be granted as final deal until 30th June 2019, the second referendum vote will not go through in April, May's deal will be back on the table for "dissection" for nothing to change as nothing can as the EU will say, so it will be May's deal or leave with no deal which 60% of the MPs do not want to happen... Aka the whole thing is a waste of money and time. | ||
|
Gorsameth
Netherlands21761 Posts
On March 14 2019 22:08 Pandemona wrote: It was May's deal or no deal 2 days ago and they voted it down again.Yes because the EU will say you cannot extend past this point, already the ERG seem to at the position of they are going to vote with her deal, that is the thing that is being spoken around at the moment. They "voted" for a Brexit without no deal the government, if the only deal they can get is the one on the table then what because the EU already said it will NOT NEGOTIATE anymore, 2nd time was more than enough. So there will be nothing to change as no way labour can get this customs trade union fairtyle he wants as it does not exist which he has been told numerous times. So all that will happen is, the extension will be granted as final deal until 30th June 2019, the second referendum vote will not go through in April, May's deal will be back on the table for "dissection" for nothing to change as nothing can as the EU will say, so it will be May's deal or leave with no deal which 60% of the MPs do not want to happen... Aka the whole thing is a waste of money and time. No-deal being acceptable lost by a mere 4 votes in the first voting yesterday. Without strong signs that the UK parliament is going to actually do something there is a good chance one of the 27 EU nations votes No to extend because there is no point in creating yet more market instability for months to have the exact same shit happen again and then its over. No deal or withdraw art 50. | ||
|
Jockmcplop
United Kingdom9674 Posts
On March 14 2019 22:37 Gorsameth wrote: It was May's deal or no deal 2 days ago and they voted it down again. No-deal being acceptable lost by a mere 4 votes in the first voting yesterday. Without strong signs that the UK parliament is going to actually do something there is a good chance one of the 27 EU nations votes No to extend because there is no point in creating yet more market instability for months to have the exact same shit happen again and then its over. No deal or withdraw art 50. This is what Hilary Benn's amendment (i) today is about. Holding a series of indicative votes to see what Parliament could theoretically pass, and then asking for a delay to sort out the details. Unfortunately all of that should have been done 2 years ago. The other problem is that the amendment is on dodgy ground constitutionally as it necessarily pauses pretty much all government business to deal with one issue and puts Parliament, rather than the government, in control of the agenda. | ||
|
m4ini
4215 Posts
Yes because the EU will say you cannot extend past this point, already the ERG seem to at the position of they are going to vote with her deal, that is the thing that is being spoken around at the moment. That's not going to happen, because that "position" is based on the assumption that they can wiggle out of the backstop like little slimy worms by shouting "HA! You activated my Article 62 of the vienna convention trap card! BACKSTOP CANCELLED LOL!". If you read this: "A fundamental change of circumstances which has occurred with regard to those existing at the time of the conclusion of a treaty, and which was not forseen by the parties, may not be invoked as ga ground for terminating or withdrawing from the treaty unless: A: the existence of those circumstances constituted an essential basis of the consent of the parties to be bound by the treaty B: the effect of the change is radically to transform the extent of obligations still to be performed under the treaty. " Unforseen is obviously pretty retarded considering that we're already discussing it, and more importantly, this will not cancel "the backstop", this will cancel everything that is around the backstop too. It's a shitshow, and it's constantly every single day, made worse by dipshits who take anything ERG claims at face value. edit: to be very clear here, the disintegration of the Soviet Union wasn't ground enough to invoke Article 62. Not being happy with a voted and ratified deal, right. This goes to show how insane and disconnected from reality JRM etc are. https://studymoose.com/article-62-of-the-vienna-convention-essay | ||
|
Gorsameth
Netherlands21761 Posts
On March 14 2019 23:00 Jockmcplop wrote: It doesn't matter what Parliament could theoretically pass. There is only 1 thing to pass and that is May's deal.This is what Hilary Benn's amendment (i) today is about. Holding a series of indicative votes to see what Parliament could theoretically pass, and then asking for a delay to sort out the details. Unfortunately all of that should have been done 2 years ago. The other problem is that the amendment is on dodgy ground constitutionally as it necessarily pauses pretty much all government business to deal with one issue and puts Parliament, rather than the government, in control of the agenda. How more simple can the EU state it. There will be no more negotiation on the deal. This is it. This has been it for 3 months. | ||
|
Jockmcplop
United Kingdom9674 Posts
On March 15 2019 01:06 Gorsameth wrote: It doesn't matter what Parliament could theoretically pass. There is only 1 thing to pass and that is May's deal. How more simple can the EU state it. There will be no more negotiation on the deal. This is it. This has been it for 3 months. This isn't it at all. That's what you are stating. The EU have also looked favourably on other types of deal that May has been so far unwilling to approach them with. Theresa May has her 'red lines' and the EU have theirs. With all of those restrictions in place, the current deal is the only deal. If May were suddenly to have a change of heart and start looking at Labour policy, there's every chance the EU would at least be interested in negotiating it. I'm at work right now but I'll go find the relevant quotes for you later. Here's a quikc example though: If, as you suggest 'this deal is it', why would Tusk advocate a long delay in Brexit for the UK to 'rethink strategy'. Surely if this is all there is you can't rethink your strategy. https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/mar/14/donald-tusk-to-encourage-eu27-to-be-open-to-long-brexit-delay But in an intervention on Thursday morning, Tusk tweeted: “During my consultations ahead of [the leaders’ summit next week], I will appeal to the EU27 to be open to a long extension if the UK finds it necessary to rethink its Brexit strategy and build consensus around it.” | ||
|
Gorsameth
Netherlands21761 Posts
On March 15 2019 01:14 Jockmcplop wrote: Unless Tusk is more talking about 'rethink into not having a Brexit' and not 'a different deal'.This isn't it at all. That's what you are stating. The EU have also looked favourably on other types of deal that May has been so far unwilling to approach them with. Theresa May has her 'red lines' and the EU have theirs. With all of those restrictions in place, the current deal is the only deal. If May were suddenly to have a change of heart and start looking at Labour policy, there's every chance the EU would at least be interested in negotiating it. I'm at work right now but I'll go find the relevant quotes for you later. Here's a quikc example though: If, as you suggest 'this deal is it', why would Tusk advocate a long delay in Brexit for the UK to 'rethink strategy'. Surely if this is all there is you can't rethink your strategy. https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/mar/14/donald-tusk-to-encourage-eu27-to-be-open-to-long-brexit-delay Not to mention any other deal would turn into 'not leaving but giving up your vote' which is going to be a damn hard sell. Its basically Corbyn's letter to May which I believe got a lot of criticism from even his own party. The suggestions from Parliament sofar have repeatedly crossed the EU's red lines, most notably by trying to separate the 4 freedoms. Plus I wouldn't confuse Tusks hopes to an EU assurance. Needing a unanimous decision rather then a majority makes it a lot more difficult. Not to mention a deadline of 2 weeks. | ||
|
Jockmcplop
United Kingdom9674 Posts
On March 15 2019 01:28 Gorsameth wrote: Unless Tusk is more talking about 'rethink into not having a Brexit' and not 'a different deal'. Not to mention any other deal would turn into 'not leaving but giving up your vote' which is going to be a damn hard sell. Its basically Corbyn's letter to May which I believe got a lot of criticism from even his own party. The suggestions from Parliament sofar have repeatedly crossed the EU's red lines, most notably by trying to separate the 4 freedoms. Plus I wouldn't confuse Tusks hopes to an EU assurance. Needing a unanimous decision rather then a majority makes it a lot more difficult. Not to mention a deadline of 2 weeks. You're right of course, but this is why Benn's amendment is important. This deal is dead, we need to see whether or not there's a possible way forward and what that could be before we start asking for things like time for another referendum or revoking a50. | ||
|
Yurie
11875 Posts
On March 15 2019 01:28 Gorsameth wrote: Unless Tusk is more talking about 'rethink into not having a Brexit' and not 'a different deal'. Not to mention any other deal would turn into 'not leaving but giving up your vote' which is going to be a damn hard sell. Its basically Corbyn's letter to May which I believe got a lot of criticism from even his own party. The suggestions from Parliament sofar have repeatedly crossed the EU's red lines, most notably by trying to separate the 4 freedoms. Plus I wouldn't confuse Tusks hopes to an EU assurance. Needing a unanimous decision rather then a majority makes it a lot more difficult. Not to mention a deadline of 2 weeks. The easiest thing for the UK would be to cancel the Brexit. Write up what they actually want and what the EU is likely to accept during the next EU parliament term and then trigger the leave clause with an actual idea again (if they still want to). | ||
| ||
