EPTUK Politics Mega-thread - Page 492
| 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 | ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
| ||
|
Dangermousecatdog
United Kingdom7084 Posts
| ||
|
Gorsameth
Netherlands21758 Posts
On March 19 2019 06:36 Plansix wrote: Summit where the vote would be held is the 21-22. So I assume the UK will be stuck at an impasse waiting for that vote.They should revoke article 50. Because banking on 27 nations agreeing to give them an extension on Brexit is a high risk maneuver. This political fantasy is going to end at some point, so they best end it on their terms. If they get an extension its another X months of this bullshit. If its denied they can try to quickly push through a art 50 withdrawl tho I hope out of spite for it to fail and Britain to be force to no-deal exit. Because god they deserve it after this shitshow. What I don't understand is how there isn't a million man march in London to get Parliament do fucking do anything at all. I can only guess the common Brit just doesn't care. | ||
|
Toadesstern
Germany16350 Posts
taking from a/the (?) general attorney of the European Court of Justice: So long story short, yes the EU court ruled that the UK can revoke article 50 by itself. That's really unpopular outside of the UK because in essence there's nothing stopping you from doing that over and over again and would have to be fixed somehow. However, the way it's worded could lead to a situation in which they can't reinitiate Art50 that easily. By wording, you're essentially not supposed to use it to get an extension, you're supposed to use it because of a change of mind. Revoking it with the stated intention "to get some more time to figure this out" isn't revoking it unconditionally, like she said. Also not unequivocally I'd assume. While a bit in the air and def not decided, it does come with dangers. They might require a couple years passed until you can trigger Art50 again after canceling it or something like that. And that's something noone wants. Having UK in the EU but neither the EU nor the UK wants them in would be pretty terrible. Honestly, at that point Brexit is pretty much cancel'd if you intended for it or not. Say the ruling is similar to what the UK does with independance referendums: "You can have one but we won't except one every year. So let's say you get your next one, if you really want it, in 5 years or so." (not a quote, just how I looking from the outside interpret the UK stance on those things) If something similar happens, I could not see a 2nd Brexit happening without a 2nd referendum at that point in the future to make sure the situation hasn't changed in the last 5 or whatever years. Which brings me to calling it "basicly cancel'd Brexit" | ||
|
Gorsameth
Netherlands21758 Posts
On March 19 2019 07:46 Toadesstern wrote: If they withdraw the UK isn't going to try again.Revoking article 50 has it's own drawbacks. taking from a/the (?) general attorney of the European Court of Justice: https://twitter.com/akulith/status/1076154140282314755 So long story short, yes the EU court ruled that the UK can revoke article 50 by itself. That's really unpopular outside of the UK because in essence there's nothing stopping you from doing that over and over again and would have to be fixed somehow. However, the way it's worded could lead to a situation in which they can't reinitiate Art50 that easily. By wording, you're essentially not supposed to use it to get an extension, you're supposed to use it because of a change of mind. Revoking it with the stated intention "to get some more time to figure this out" isn't revoking it unconditionally, like she said. Also not unequivocally I'd assume. While a bit in the air and def not decided, it does come with dangers. They might require a couple years passed until you can trigger Art50 again after canceling it or something like that. And that's something noone wants. Having UK in the EU but neither the EU nor the UK wants them in would be pretty terrible. No one sees this shit show and thinks "Lets try agains in 2 years". | ||
|
Toadesstern
Germany16350 Posts
On March 19 2019 07:47 Gorsameth wrote: If they withdraw the UK isn't going to try again. No one sees this shit show and thinks "Lets try agains in 2 years". I'm not so sure about that. How likely it is? I don't know, but some people are talking about it openly, which is exactly why that tweet above exists in the first place. Because she felt the need to explain that if the UK actually attempts that it might be a bit different than what the MPs imagine it to be. That being said, hard to judge how the public would react to Brexit being cancel'd. I can understand your sentiment but I can just as much imagine the anti-EU sentiment growing even stronger as a result. | ||
KwarK
United States42887 Posts
On March 19 2019 07:42 Gorsameth wrote: Summit where the vote would be held is the 21-22. So I assume the UK will be stuck at an impasse waiting for that vote. If they get an extension its another X months of this bullshit. If its denied they can try to quickly push through a art 50 withdrawl tho I hope out of spite for it to fail and Britain to be force to no-deal exit. Because god they deserve it after this shitshow. What I don't understand is how there isn't a million man march in London to get Parliament do fucking do anything at all. I can only guess the common Brit just doesn't care. A million men marched against Iraq. It subsequently turned out that Blair had pledged British support before the vote and before the intelligence report. | ||
|
Gorsameth
Netherlands21758 Posts
On March 19 2019 07:58 Toadesstern wrote: Politicians are talking about it because politicians have been talking BS for the past 2 years.I'm not so sure about that. How likely it is? I don't know, but some people are talking about it openly, which is exactly why that tweet above exists in the first place. Because she felt the need to explain that if the UK actually attempts that it might be a bit different than what the MPs imagine it to be. That being said, hard to judge how the public would react to Brexit being cancel'd. I can understand your sentiment but I can just as much imagine the anti-EU sentiment growing even stronger as a result. Its theater plain and simple "Look how I am trying to get the brexit you voted for, it will be the best deal ever, I'll totally do it next time. Go vote for me again even tho we could have left now by simply agreeing on any sort of deal at all" | ||
|
showstealer1829
Australia3123 Posts
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 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. It's a motion, not a vote. By losing the motion the motion never existed. | ||
|
Cyro
United Kingdom20299 Posts
On March 19 2019 07:42 Gorsameth wrote: Summit where the vote would be held is the 21-22. So I assume the UK will be stuck at an impasse waiting for that vote. If they get an extension its another X months of this bullshit. If its denied they can try to quickly push through a art 50 withdrawl tho I hope out of spite for it to fail and Britain to be force to no-deal exit. Because god they deserve it after this shitshow. What I don't understand is how there isn't a million man march in London to get Parliament do fucking do anything at all. I can only guess the common Brit just doesn't care. There's one on the 23'rd, see https://www.peoples-vote.uk/march Too little too late, i agree. Because god they deserve it after this shitshow. Unfortunately "they" is only a fraction of the population | ||
|
Banaora
Germany234 Posts
On March 19 2019 15:00 showstealer1829 wrote: It's a motion, not a vote. By losing the motion the motion never existed. The motion was not lost. It was voted through but without the amendment. It was the motion to ask for an extension of article 50 in case May succeeds to pass her deal through parliament. It was supposed to give parliament enough time to pass the necessary laws in that case. As May's deal has no chance to pass the motion is now pointless. | ||
|
iamthedave
England2814 Posts
On March 19 2019 07:59 KwarK wrote: A million men marched against Iraq. It subsequently turned out that Blair had pledged British support before the vote and before the intelligence report. Yup. Just one of the reasons why he will never, ever be forgiven. | ||
|
Longshank
1648 Posts
On March 19 2019 16:54 Banaora wrote: The motion was not lost. It was voted through but without the amendment. It was the motion to ask for an extension of article 50 in case May succeeds to pass her deal through parliament. It was supposed to give parliament enough time to pass the necessary laws in that case. As May's deal has no chance to pass the motion is now pointless. I fear it's too early to write her deal off completely. There are (unconventional)ways for her to push it through to a vote. For instance, if she can secure a majority to back her deal, which would be needed anyway for it to pass, they can overrule Bercow. There are other ways as well. My gut feeling is that we haven't seen the last of her deal. | ||
|
CuddlyCuteKitten
Sweden2636 Posts
In the real world however international politics is not really rules driven and any laws or rules between countries are at a core level just an agreed code of conduct between them (seeing as international law is extremely hard to enforce). If you break international law you only get consequences if enough countries agree to put pressure onto you until you accept those consequences (which is why powerful countries get to ignore smaller transgressions all the time). But the other side of that coin is that you can't really bend the law because it's "technically correct" either because the other countries will get pissed off just the same and there is no higher authority to tell them to eat it. In society a state backs whatever a judge says but when it comes down to it EU law is just agreements between all the countries in the union. And if all other countries think one other member is abusing the rules they will change (or more likely the court will "clarify" their ruling). Revoking article 50 will almost certainly kill Brexit for the foreseeable future and I think we will see measures put into place to specifically make sure that UK parliament can not fuck it up for "X amounts of years". | ||
|
iPlaY.NettleS
Australia4337 Posts
On March 19 2019 06:36 Plansix wrote: They should revoke article 50. Because banking on 27 nations agreeing to give them an extension on Brexit is a high risk maneuver. This political fantasy is going to end at some point, so they best end it on their terms. The people voted to leave.60% of labour constituencies voted to leave so it’s a shame labour mps are not listening to what people in their electorates want. Hopeful that a Hungary or Italy will refuse to extend.Fully aware that a hard brexit would trigger an economic meltdown worse than the GFC but it’d be for the best i think.The system needs to change and bailing out banks and multinationals (Obama with auto bailouts) did nothing to actually fix the system it is still totally fucked. So crash it completely and try build it better.Something that actually is sustainable for the planet.This is the hope.I think the future is local. | ||
|
Artisreal
Germany9235 Posts
That's like 6% more than the current US president managed to get. How many Labour voters actually voted leave though? Your post suggests it's the majority, albeit it being roughly 35%, according to a yougov poll in 2016. | ||
|
m4ini
4215 Posts
| ||
|
solidbebe
Netherlands4921 Posts
*Tusk has literally just now made a statement that he believes a short extension is possible on the condition of a positive vote on the WA agreement in the HoC. So basically May has to somehow find a way to hold a third vote on her WA AND get it to pass to get any sort of extension. Not likely to happen. | ||
|
Excludos
Norway8111 Posts
On March 21 2019 01:07 solidbebe wrote: So May has asked for a short extension so she can push through her deal. She has got to be actually delusional at this point. There are also rumours going around that Macron will oppose any extension. If that's true then no deal is basically the most likely outcome now. Since the only 2 options left are "ask for an extension (and fail)" and "withdraw article 50", you might as well do the first before the other so you can claim that you at least tried. | ||
|
Gorsameth
Netherlands21758 Posts
On March 21 2019 01:07 solidbebe wrote: And another news story I read has just said that the European Commission rejects a delay until June because of the EU elections. Either an extension till just before the election in may or atleast until the end of the year.So May has asked for a short extension so she can push through her deal. She has got to be actually delusional at this point. There are also rumours going around that Macron will oppose any extension. If that's true then no deal is basically the most likely outcome now. *Tusk has literally just now made a statement that he believes a short extension is possible on the condition of a positive vote on the WA agreement in the HoC. So basically May has to somehow find a way to hold a third vote on her WA AND get it to pass to get any sort of extension. Not likely to happen. Either way the reality of holding a vote in UK parlaiment to show positive intent before the EU votes on an extension seems unlikely considering the timeframe. EU summit is tomorrow and the day after. UK leaves in 9 days. To little, to late. | ||
| ||
