Politics

[Cheese]

1 minute ago, Tonge moor green jacket said:

It'd be some going for a no deal situation to get through parliament now

It's the default position. The government can literally DO NOTHING and it happens. If/when the Withdrawal Agreement fails next week, as it stands nothing can be done. The EU won't renegotiate, May has ruled out a second referendum, and even if she stepped down there's not enough time to arrange one. Article 50 notification was insane but rules are rules. Especially legally binding ones. 

Unless something really major occurs, No Deal is where we're heading.

[Guest]

5 minutes ago, Cheese said:

It's the default position. The government can literally DO NOTHING and it happens. If/when the Withdrawal Agreement fails next week, as it stands nothing can be done. The EU won't renegotiate, May has ruled out a second referendum, and even if she stepped down there's not enough time to arrange one. Article 50 notification was insane but rules are rules. Especially legally binding ones. 

Unless something really major occurs, No Deal is where we're heading.

Which is nice!

 

It won't happen , BTW

[Salford Trotter]

3 minutes ago, Cheese said:

It's the default position. The government can literally DO NOTHING and it happens. If/when the Withdrawal Agreement fails next week, as it stands nothing can be done. The EU won't renegotiate, May has ruled out a second referendum, and even if she stepped down there's not enough time to arrange one. Article 50 notification was insane but rules are rules. Especially legally binding ones. 

Unless something really major occurs, No Deal is where we're heading.

Now we have the Grieve amendment which hands back an element of control to Parliament, the fact that a majority of MPs do not favour a hard brexit so it is more likely that Article 50 gets extended or we have a GE at which point all options are back on table dependant on who wins. The prospect of remaining in the EU has greatly increased in my opinion    

[Cheese]

4 minutes ago, Salford Trotter said:

Now we have the Grieve amendment which hands back an element of control to Parliament, the fact that a majority of MPs do not favour a hard brexit so it is more likely that Article 50 gets extended or we have a GE at which point all options are back on table dependant on who wins. The prospect of remaining in the EU has greatly increased in my opinion    

It's increased from impossible, to extremely unlikely. 

[Tonge moor green jacket]

14 minutes ago, Cheese said:

It's the default position. The government can literally DO NOTHING and it happens. If/when the Withdrawal Agreement fails next week, as it stands nothing can be done. The EU won't renegotiate, May has ruled out a second referendum, and even if she stepped down there's not enough time to arrange one. Article 50 notification was insane but rules are rules. Especially legally binding ones. 

Unless something really major occurs, No Deal is where we're heading.

Something major will occur, one way or another.

Its even possible that your arse may remain banana free, at least for a while.

[Cheese]

10 minutes ago, boltondiver said:

It won't happen , BTW

How will it be avoided? 

[Cheese]

Just now, Tonge moor green jacket said:

Something major will occur, one way or another.

Its even possible that your arse may remain banana free, at least for a while.

I hope not. I've been practising, and I've started to enjoy it a bit.

[Guest]

15 minutes ago, Cheese said:

How will it be avoided? 

Well,  there's no such thing as a "no deal"

[Cheese]

19 minutes ago, boltondiver said:

Well,  there's no such thing as a "no deal"

So what happens on March 29th when we've failed to agree a deal? 

[tyldesley_white]

11 minutes ago, Cheese said:

So what happens on March 29th when we've failed to agree a deal? 

go to the WTO, and a lot of people think it will be plain sailing from there on in ... im not one of them by the way

[birch-chorley]

1 hour ago, Cheese said:

Article 50 notification was insane but rules are rules. Especially legally binding ones. 

Didn’t the EU refuse to even sit down and discuss anything until article 50 was triggered? If so then it’s hardly insane, it had to be triggered just so we could begin to move forward. Waiting 4 or 5 years just to trigger it would have prolonged the uncertainty and we would have been in the same position that we are now, just a few years later 

[Cheese]

11 minutes ago, birch-chorley said:

Didn’t the EU refuse to even sit down and discuss anything until article 50 was triggered? If so then it’s hardly insane, it had to be triggered just so we could begin to move forward. Waiting 4 or 5 years just to trigger it would have prolonged the uncertainty and we would have been in the same position that we are now, just a few years later 

Do you not think it would have been a good idea to work out what we actually wanted before activating a 2 year countdown? 

 

Don't forget - we ARE the EU. The EU is not an external power trying to destroy us. It's a fucking Union, and we are one of the most influential members. 

Edited December 5, 2018 by Cheese

[Duck Egg]

1 hour ago, Cheese said:

Nope. I haven't "always said" anything. My opinions have changed based on the insane actions of this government. We are leaving with No Deal. I didn't believe anyone would be mad enough to actually go ahead with that, but it's almost unavoidable now. I hope my opinion changes again in the next couple of months, but nothing has happened to convince me otherwise. 

Apologies chief if that's not the case. Just that for the last few months, until I lost interest in the whole thing, you said (in almost every post) - there is going to be no deal and "that has been the plan since day 1".

I thought you had some kind of insider knowledge you sounded so sure.

Fwiw - I think there will be a deal. Probably one that pleases no one but I think now a 2nd referendum is more likely than a hard brexit 

[Cheese]

Just now, Duck Egg said:

Apologies chief if that's not the case. Just that for the last few months, until I lost interest in the whole thing, you said (in almost every post) - there is going to be no deal and "that has been the plan since day 1".

I thought you had some kind of insider knowledge you sounded so sure.

Fwiw - I think there will be a deal. Probably one that pleases no one but I think now a 2nd referendum is more likely than a hard brexit 

No need to apologise. I haven't "said that in every post" though, because I changed my opinion over a year ago as things progressed. 

There won't be a second referendum. We are Leaving with No Deal. It is going to be the first time in history that a first world country has deliberately wrecked itself. The biggest con ever. It had to happen to someone - unfortunately it's us. 

[birch-chorley]

7 hours ago, Cheese said:

Do you not think it would have been a good idea to work out what we actually wanted before activating a 2 year countdown? 

 

Don't forget - we ARE the EU. The EU is not an external power trying to destroy us. It's a fucking Union, and we are one of the most influential members. 

Of course the government knew what they wanted, i’d wager it was to deliver on the referendum whilst limiting the short / medium term damage as best as possible 

When would you have preferred them to trigger article 50, 2019? The additional time in limbo would have been even worse for the economy 

Whilst to a certain extent ‘we are the EU’, you know full well that doesn’t mean we can have a seat at the other side of the table negotiating with ourselves. It was a clear directive from the EU, no negotiation starts until article 50 is triggered 

[bwfcfan5]

3 hours ago, birch-chorley said:

Of course the government knew what they wanted, i’d wager it was to deliver on the referendum whilst limiting the short / medium term damage as best as possible 

When would you have preferred them to trigger article 50, 2019? The additional time in limbo would have been even worse for the economy 

Whilst to a certain extent ‘we are the EU’, you know full well that doesn’t mean we can have a seat at the other side of the table negotiating with ourselves. It was a clear directive from the EU, no negotiation starts until article 50 is triggered 

The government? This deal has been done by May and her civil servant posse. 

The government clearly either don't back it or are grimacing their way through it. 

We'd not be here if May had (as papers are now suggesting she will) drawn up a cross party group to lead negotiations. 

[Mounts Kipper]

27 minutes ago, bwfcfan5 said:

The government? This deal has been done by May and her civil servant posse. 

The government clearly either don't back it or are grimacing their way through it. 

We'd not be here if May had (as papers are now suggesting she will) drawn up a cross party group to lead negotiations. 

Let us hope if its a cross party group its made up predominantly of leavers.     

[Spider]

15 hours ago, Mounts Kipper said:

I’ve not really mentioned trade deals that much

 

 

[bwfcfan5]

22 minutes ago, Mounts Kipper said:

Let us hope if its a cross party group its made up predominantly of leavers.     

That would be silly given most of parliament are remainers. Ultimately any deal brought back needs to get through parliament. Otherwise its a lot of wasted time. We are currently seeing what happens when you bring back a deal that virtually nobody likes.

Any group would need to be inclusive of views but also able to compromise. 

[Tonge moor green jacket]

48 minutes ago, Mounts Kipper said:

Let us hope if its a cross party group its made up predominantly of leavers.     

I don't really see how it would work. Not sure why it wasn't done originally; perhaps all sorts of reasons, but there would have to be shed loads of compromise from its members.

There seems little evidence of that currently, and I could envisage a situation where yet another battle ensues over who sits on it.

Folk have had enough of all the procrastination.

We'll never know just how good or bad this deal is if it's voted down; and as things are at the moment, the way I see parliament operating, there seems to be manoeuvres towards no brexit.

That could bring about some serious knock on effects.

Some comments about trying to get the backstop stumbling block resolved with the EU; ideally that sounds great, though I'm not sure how much will there is to achieve that from the EU.

Uncharted waters.

[kent_white]

1 hour ago, Spider said:

I’ve not really mentioned gravity that much

[birch-chorley]

1 hour ago, bwfcfan5 said:

That would be silly given most of parliament are remainers. Ultimately any deal brought back needs to get through parliament. Otherwise its a lot of wasted time. We are currently seeing what happens when you bring back a deal that virtually nobody likes.

Any group would need to be inclusive of views but also able to compromise. 

Say what you want about May’s deal, but it would get through theEU 27 

what makes you think a cross party team would come back with something vastly different? 

[Tonge moor green jacket]

3 minutes ago, birch-chorley said:

Say what you want about May’s deal, but it would get through theEU 27 

what makes you think a cross party team would come back with something vastly different? 

Quite. I've been watching some of today's debate. John McDonnell started in a calm and considered manner, and was thanked during interventions.

It was also asked that he put aside his "6 tests",  in line with his own request for the house to compromise, and describe what was needed to modify the deal so that he would support it. An avoidance of party politicing were the words used.

He then proceeded to offer a party political broadcast. Seems the debate is somewhat pointless.

So much for coming together to sort it out. Again makes the suggestion of a cross party plan less attractive.

 

[Mounts Kipper]

15 minutes ago, birch-chorley said:

Say what you want about May’s deal, but it would get through theEU 27 

what makes you think a cross party team would come back with something vastly different? 

The backstop needs to be dealt with and if it is then I’d think the commons vote would be very close. 

[Mounts Kipper]

4 minutes ago, Tonge moor green jacket said:

Quite. I've been watching some of today's debate. John McDonnell started in a calm and considered manner, and was thanked during interventions.

It was also asked that he put aside his "6 tests",  in line with his own request for the house to compromise, and describe what was needed to modify the deal so that he would support it. An avoidance of party politicing were the words used.

He then proceeded to offer a party political broadcast. Seems the debate is somewhat pointless.

So much for coming together to sort it out. Again makes the suggestion of a cross party plan less attractive.

 

He’s a first class CUNT!