|
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 |
On March 15 2019 04:12 Zaros wrote:Show nested quote +On March 15 2019 03:44 Gorsameth wrote:
So now the UK will ask for an extension, but no one knows why or for what because the needle hasn't moved.
Hopefully one of the 27 will deny it because its pointless without a clear line to an actual deal both sides can agree on.
No deal or cancel art 50. The choice is yours Britain. No deal, they will never outright cancel Brexit
Brexit has de facto already been cancelled,they just can not make it official.
2 years negotiating and a law to make sure Britain really leaves the eu end march. But the law doesn't mean anything and can be changed if needed,as appears to be the case now.
What more is there to do,everything has been discussed in past 2 years,there is nothing left besides delay forever till there is a good way to cancel the brexit.
Uk could have accepted the deal,it was a good deal and all those worries about backstop are nonsense. It could have been dealth with once the problem is actually there.
And legal binding or not,britain is still a souvereign country and in reality they could have stepped out of the backstop anytime they wanted. They could have accepted the deal and go ahead with negotiations about trade relations,just to see what it leads to and if that would be an ok outcome. But they stop everything
because of a potential problem 2 years from now that in reality might not even become a problem at all.
|
On March 15 2019 08:01 Toadesstern wrote:The saddest part about this mess it that it's really not all that complicated and made complicated due to the situation in the UK: ![[image loading]](https://i.imgur.com/YcLP7tB.png) That single slide basicly explains everything you need to know. You have all kinds of different possible relationships you can have with the EU, from the left being the closest, still being in the EU, down to the very right with trade-deal like we have with Korea and Canada or even more extreme, no deal at all and thus having WTO rules. It's literally all you need to know. Noone makes you choose anything, you get to pick which solution you want going forward. It even explains what "downsides" each different solution comes with, spelling out Mays redlines and explaining what you need to provide to get to what level (above Canada-style) more or less. And for some reason it's too complicated to take this chart and make someone point a finger towards one of the different steps on that ladder.
See that looks all very reasonable till you realise that what hard brexiteers want is No deal and a denial that there is a whole gamut of possibilities which the EU is open to for the sake of economic co-operation and UK just has to choose, otherwise they can't just blame the EU for everything.
Also that part of brexiteers schtick is that UK can retain power in the EU and favourable financial trade whilst having no free movement. Or regulation from the EU. With an independent trade policy. When you take that hard brexiteers don't want a custom union, that just leaves Canada/South Korea and no deal. Except it will take years for a Canada/South Korea negotiation. So just No deal. Which royally fucks over everyone who isn't a hard brexiteer. Thus the conservatives will simply lose half their electorate. And then North Ireland says Hi, what about our border with Ireland?".
|
On March 15 2019 19:35 pmh wrote:Show nested quote +On March 15 2019 04:12 Zaros wrote:On March 15 2019 03:44 Gorsameth wrote:
So now the UK will ask for an extension, but no one knows why or for what because the needle hasn't moved.
Hopefully one of the 27 will deny it because its pointless without a clear line to an actual deal both sides can agree on.
No deal or cancel art 50. The choice is yours Britain. No deal, they will never outright cancel Brexit Brexit has de facto already been cancelled,they just can not make it official. 2 years negotiating and a law to make sure Britain really leaves the eu end march. But the law doesn't mean anything and can be changed if needed,as appears to be the case now. What more is there to do,everything has been discussed in past 2 years,there is nothing left besides delay forever till there is a good way to cancel the brexit. Uk could have accepted the deal,it was a good deal and all those worries about backstop are nonsense. It could have been dealth with once the problem is actually there. And legal binding or not,britain is still a souvereign country and in reality they could have stepped out of the backstop anytime they wanted. They could have accepted the deal and go ahead with negotiations about trade relations,just to see what it leads to and if that would be an ok outcome. But they stop everything because of a potential problem 2 years from now that in reality might not even become a problem at all. There is so much worry about the backstop because of the fundamental problem it covers.
The Irish border, there is no solution to it and no one knows how to resolve the situation of needing both no border and a border at the same time.
Yes Britain could just end the backstop if they wanted, the EU couldn't stop them but what happens when you do so?
A hard border running through Ireland and a violation of the Good Friday agreement. And no one wants to risk that again.
|
The funny thing is, is that the "Irish backstop" in Theresa's May deal isn't actually a backstop. It's an agreement to continue the customs union till a magical/technological solution can be found that can prevent a hard border whilst being out of the customs union. It is a backstop in name only. But the conception of the backstop seems complicated enough that May's backstop don't even get an proper explanation most of the time. The only reason why Theresa May sells it as a backstop in the first place was because she copied the language of the hard brexiteers, who only wanted a backstop because they found it politically expedient to not to be seen as throwing NI into disaster.
|
Isn't Gibraltar being a British enclave once they leave the EU a problem beacuse of the border? Sure its not dramatic or large but I don't see why it's not an issue if a hard Brexit occurred.
|
It's not an issue to UK, or the EU. It's only an issue to Gilbraltar, who the conservative party couldn't give a fig about. Gilbraltar is unlikely to descend to civil war as a result of a lack of a customs union border. UK cares about what happens in Northen Ireland because it is part of the country. EU cares about NI, because EU is accomodating.
|
On March 16 2019 06:47 Sermokala wrote:
Isn't Gibraltar being a British enclave once they leave the EU a problem beacuse of the border? Sure its not dramatic or large but I don't see why it's not an issue if a hard Brexit occurred. It is an issue, its being overshadowed by Ireland and the fact that many people probably don't even know Gibraltar belongs to the UK.
I believe a long time ago Spain made some statements about wanting to help keep movement of people easy because of people travelling across the border daily for work.
And according to 1 minute on google Gibraltar isn't part of the customs union? So that makes it all a lot easier.
|
Yeah there is actual border, with checks and customs in Gibraltar. The problem is - there are people living in Spain and working in Gibraltar, could be a mess in a no-deal scenario. But its completely different issue than Ireland.
|
I stand corrected. Spain cares, and Ireland cares, therefore the EU cares.
|
Gibraltor is our Puerto Rico. It plays no part in political calculus, sad to say.
We're 12 days away. I wonder what twist will come next? I still think the EU will make us crash out on the 28th. They're sick of this nonsense and rightfully so.
|
UK should just leave the EU. If they remain they will continue to work against closer integration from the inside and gives anti EU parties way too much material to work with. It is time for the EU to step up and fulfill its role as an economic superpower.
|
On March 16 2019 18:34 iamthedave wrote:
Gibraltor is our Puerto Rico. It plays no part in political calculus, sad to say.
We're 12 days away. I wonder what twist will come next? I still think the EU will make us crash out on the 28th. They're sick of this nonsense and rightfully so.
Yes we are. All the british expats in my area have applied for French nationality (and got it), and we are sick of dealing with the problem child. You always had advantageous conditions for joining, you were accomodated every step of the way, with voting rights. Your country's position was more or less always advocating for less integration, and now you want out but again, problems.
I very much love the UK, I wish you were a full and happy member of the EU, I'd very much love a second referendum and having you stay even at current conditions (hoping if wouldn't tear the country apart too much...), because I believe we are stronger as an alliance, but I can't go against the will of (a very short) majority. Now if your leaders would only take a f*****g decision, whichever it is, and stop making us all lose time... It's like we have a second Belgium government, a pain to look at.
|
Today John Bercow, the speaker of the House of Commons, ruled out another vote on May's withdrawal agreement if there are no substantial changes to it. Since 1604 he said parliament has not voted on the same motion twice. He justified the second vote for the withdrawal agreement because according to him there have been significant changes to it and further documents were published.
So May can't get another vote on her deal as the EU27 said they will not renegotiate with her.
Bercow also said today that it would be possible for any member of the House of Commons to ask for an emergency debate under standing order 24 to for example start a debate about revoking article 50.
Should the opposition table a successful vote of no confidence it is unknown whether the EU27 would grant an extension to article 50 to allow time for an election. An extension would require unanimous support from 27 countries.
|
The EU today also said that it could suspend until July but if it takes longer, britain needs to hold EU elections... Merkel seemed ok with this, Macron not so much.
Pls just leave.
|
Well to me it is either a no deal brexit or a revocation of article 50. As the other options would require an extension of article 50 which is difficult to get from all 27 EU countries.
As a no deal exit, which was voted down in parliament, is detrimental to the UK as well as to the rest of the EU my hope is that article 50 will be revoked and the UK stays a member of the EU.
|
I'm kinda intrigued by the shitshow UK politics would become if that happens.
In Switzerland we'll soon be in a similar boat because the EU is pressing hard to make our relationship more binding/automatic... Our right (due to brexit reasons) and the left (due to work regulations) are less than thrilled to agree to this.
|
So did TIG kill off any prospect of a second referendum last week in a pathetic attempt to appear relevant? Fucking idiots if so.
|
TIG tabled an amendment to a motion asking for a 2nd referendum. So the rule to not vote on the same motion twice should not apply there, but I'm not sure.
The problem is there is no time left for a 2nd referendum. And an extension to article 50 is a big gamble. Even if there were a referendum what would change if remain wins 52-48? A third referendum?
David Cameron once said he doesn't want a neverendum. That's how you would get one.
|
On March 19 2019 04:39 Banaora wrote:
TIG tabled an amendment to a motion asking for a 2nd referendum. So the rule to not vote on the same motion twice should not apply there, but I'm not sure.
The problem is there is no time left for a 2nd referendum. And an extension to article 50 is a big gamble. Even if there were a referendum what changes if remain wins 52-48? A third referendum?
David Cameron once said he doesn't want a neverendum. That's how you would get one.
I'm not sure either. When asked about it after his statement, Bercow was very vague "it depends on the context of the proposition". TIG was warned about this last week numerous times by the People's Vote campaign, that they risked blowing their one shot while there was no majority in parliament.
I'm also not sure(and many with me it would seem) what a "significant change" to the deal entails. To get any meaningful concession from the EU seems unlikely, but what if May did as Labour suggests and put her deal up and agreed to take it to the people if it passes? In that case, the context would have changed significantly.
|
So Theresa May is basically screwed, with Bercow decision, as she can't keep kicking the can down the road while saying parliament keeps reject her and the EU's deal. SO either the UK goes hard brexit, or prays the EU allows them to delay the inevitable...?
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
