Brexit

[Mervyn and Trish]

It is if you're an owl......

[oldbluefox]

It's a stutter.......

[Stephen]

It looks like a no deal will be the likely outcome.

No-deal Brexit now 'assumed' by government, says Gove https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-49141375

[Manoverboard]

The report says " Mr Johnson has made Mr Gove responsible for planning a no-deal Brexit " … so if Mr Gove said a ' No Deal ' wasn't at all likely he would be out of a job

[Stephen]

The report says " Mr Johnson has made Mr Gove responsible for planning a no-deal Brexit " … so if Mr Gove said a ' No Deal ' wasn't at all likely he would be out of a job

Best keep his mouth shut and get on with it, or him and his government will be up the road come the general election.

[oldbluefox]

If the EU are not going to move on TM's deal which has already been rejected by Parliament the only option is to leave on a no deal basis. The sensible option is to leave with a deal (IMO) but that option does not appear to be on the table so no deal it is then.
It's certainly put the fox in the coop and got the smug TV Remainer commentators, (those who arrogantly seem to know what we did or did not vote for), running around like headless chickens.

[barney]

The amazing thing is that the EU have still not come to terms with the change of guard.
They are still insisting that the deal, which is actually a proposal, is the deal.

This Governments job is now to convince them that what was is not what is.

I think the penny will eventually drop.
The option of parliament stopping no deal looks dead in the water as is another people's vote.

Even as a bit of an old leftie, I can see that Corbyn is now unelectable.
So, any vote of no confidence will probably end with another Tory government, maybe in coalition with Brexit if they work it right.

I fear that Labour will be out of power for some time, maybe even relegated to fourth behind Liberal Hypocrats and the brexit party.

If predict that the UK leaving the EU is now inevitable.

[Mervyn and Trish]

I agree with a lot of what you say Barney.

The proposal was put to the UK parliament three times and rejected three times. It has never been an agreement or a deal.

If the EU cannot understand that and refuse to discuss an alternative they risk "no deal", which is in no one's best interest. It is, however, under their own rules, the default position.

They are gambling that the British political system will find some way of preventing that. But they risk misjudging the British public as they did three years ago.

If there were to be another referendum with the two options of remain or leave with no deal I wouldn't bet on which way it would go.

Yes it's true we have more information about the implications of Brexit than we had when we voted for it. But we also have more evidence of how out of touch politicians here and the bureaucrats of the EU are. I wonder which will weigh more?

[david63]

There definitely seems to be a realisation by some MPs that the country is sick to death of all of this nonsense and wants to "move on" and I would like to hope that it will move things forward.

Out of curiosity if the boot was on the other foot and the UK accepted the WA and one or more EU member countries did not do you not think that there would be a renegotiation?

[Ray Scully]

I agree with a lot of what you say Barney.

The proposal was put to the UK parliament three times and rejected three times. It has never been an agreement or a deal.

If the EU cannot understand that and refuse to discuss an alternative they risk "no deal", which is in no one's best interest. It is, however, under their own rules, the default position.

They are gambling that the British political system will find some way of preventing that. But they risk misjudging the British public as they did three years ago.

If there were to be another referendum with the two options of remain or leave with no deal I wouldn't bet on which way it would go.

Yes it's true we have more information about the implications of Brexit than we had when we voted for it. But we also have more evidence of how out of touch politicians here and the bureaucrats of the EU are. I wonder which will weigh more?

For many the issues are no longer a consideration, many on both sides are only interested in their team winning. It has now approached the tribalism present in soccer support

[barney]

Democracy is really the only issue.

Everything else pales into insignificance.

If this nation has a legitimate vote and then parliament refuses to uphold the result, it is the end of democracy as we know it.

What happens next time?

[Ray Scully]

Democracy is really the only issue.

Everything else pales into insignificance.

If this nation has a legitimate vote and then parliament refuses to uphold the result, it is the end of democracy as we know it.

What happens next time?

Barney , dogma is already replacing democracy. The greatest threat to our democracy will be a painful exit from the EU with many losing out, most probably the poorest and least able to take the hit. Today my share portfolio has risen nicely whilst the young family across the way are taking a hit on the spending money for their European vacation.
As to what happens next time, I don't think we will be having many more referenda, and if we do they will be far more sophistically couched than the present dog's dinner.

[Manoverboard]

Whenever there is a change there are winners and losers …. if we were to stay in the EU and it went pear shaped, as indeed it could, then your shares would go down and the family across the way would be having their holidays in a caravan park in the UK.

The Euro and the US Dollar have gone up and down over a period of many years and not one of these fluctuations was due to Brexit.

[Gill W]

Perhaps it’d help if Johnson actually had a draft new deal to discuss with them.

As the U.K. has already agreed a deal, it’s up to the U.K. to come up with something different.

Johnson being bellicose and telling them to drop the backstop isn’t the way to get them round the table again

[Mervyn and Trish]

Sorry Gill but the UK has not agreed a deal. If we had we'd be out and Theresa May would still be PM.

She brought a proposal back and put it before parliament. They rejected it three times.

[barney]

Correction Gill.
It was not a deal but a proposition, which was rejected three times by Parliament.

The EU will have to get their heads around that, like it or not.

Some idiot was on TV on the weekend, the Liberal leader proposing another vote based on the rejected agreement or remain.
How can you have a vote on accepting a rejected deal

[Gill W]

The deal is the one that was thrashed out after two years of hard negotiations.

It was agreed between the U.K. negotiators and the EU negotiators.

As the U.K. is saying that we don’t want the deal that was agreed between the negotiating teams it’s up to us to think up something different.

We can’t expect the EU to come up with another deal. We are the ones who want to leave (well based on a tainted referendum with a close result 3 years ago) and we are the ones who are now saying we don’t like the negotiated deal. It’s up to us.

I genuinely think that Johnson have no idea what a new deal would look like, they have nothing except empty posturing.

EU know this. I can’t see why they’d even want to neet Johnson and be subjected to hot air and bluster and no substance

[Mervyn and Trish]

The negotiating team is not the government. The proposal had to be ratified by the European Parliament, which it was, and ours, which it wasn't. So it's not a deal. Not an agreement.

And what's the point in the UK putting any time or effort into coming up with a new idea when the EU say they won't renegotiate?

I think Boris has made it pretty clear the backstop is the sticking point. In fact that's been clear for months. They say it can't be changed.

So, much as I don't want a no deal exit, I think we're now doing what we should have done 3 years ago and are seriously preparing for one. If the EU are happy with that so be it. If they're not they only have to say the word.

[Gill W]

The backstop was the U.K.’s idea in the first place. It’s a bit rich saying we don’t want it now, but have no idea about any alternative.

It’s all well and good waffling about ‘technology’ but the time is fast approaching when detail is required.

Anyway, it’s clear what Johnson is trying to do. He has no plan, except to blame the EU for everything.

[Mervyn and Trish]

If they continue to refuse to negotiate despite seeing clearly the prenvious proposal will not pass parliament they are rightly to blame. They are gambling that the result of their intransigence will be no Brexit.

[barney]

Teresa May should have taken the proposal to parliament for ratification, before agreeing it with the EU.
It's a bit like a Union agreeing a pay deal without putting it to it's members. It just never happens.

I can't see much point in the PM racing around Europe just to get doors slammed in his face.
If they won't remove their red lines, there is nothing to discuss.

Once the EU accept that this part of the proposed agreement can't get through parliament, then maybe talks can start again.

If not, it is what it is.
At long last, someone has turned off Groundhog Day.

[Manoverboard]

There is, or can be, a technical solution to goods crossing Irish / UK / Irish borders … the same solution that exists between the EU Countries and Switzerland for example. Where there's a will there's a way … my ol Mum used to say.

ps … I recall that the EU wanted the backstop as much if not more than TM.

[barney]

Not so Moby.
The EU required the backstop between the North and Ireland but TM insisted that it covered all of the UK.
Go figure that one.

It was because she lost her majority and needed to get into bed with Dup.

[Gill W]

There is, or can be, a technical solution to goods crossing Irish / UK / Irish borders … the same solution that exists between the EU Countries and Switzerland for example. Where there's a will there's a way … my ol Mum used to say.

ps … I recall that the EU wanted the backstop as much if not more than TM.

They've had three years to work on this.

If a technological solution exists, or is being worked on, now is the time to reveal the details.

If they can't do this, there is no technological solution for the unique situation and history regarding the Irish border, and it is not forthcoming in the foreseeable future.

PS. The backstop was a British proposal

[Gill W]

If they continue to refuse to negotiate despite seeing clearly the prenvious proposal will not pass parliament they are rightly to blame. They are gambling that the result of their intransigence will be no Brexit.

I feel sure, if Johnson actually had a detailed new plan for the Withdrawal Agreement, they'd be more than happy to get round the table to discuss it.

As it is Johnson has nothing, except waffle, piffle and bluster. Why would they want to waste their time on that ?