#Brexit

Kim Wrong Un said:
I don't think there would be revocation, because TM is obsessed with holding the Tories together. I would say the most likely outcome is still her deal as MPs get cold feet, followed by a GE, followed by no-deal. Strong chance Corbyn would win GE too (which ironically might make matters even worse!) The whole thing is a national disgrace but perhaps something good will come out of it in the longer term, maybe some much-needed humility, maybe a more modest, chilled-out Scandinavian-style mentality will eventually emerge - but the journey to that will be brutal.
Click to expand...
Whatever she does will tear them apart, leaving with no deal and the disaster that would unfold would probably (hopefully) be the end of them altogether. I don't think her bill will even be allowed back by the speaker and if it were, I don't think it would pass, which would leave us with no deal, revocation or asking for a long extension. Asking for another extension would not only be humiliating, it would leave our fate again in the hands of the EU and they are likely to say no (unless an GE or new referendum are tabled). I don't think May will ask for this anyway as her plan is clearly to make April 12th a hard deadline by ensuring we do not participate in the EU elections and therefore cannot have any further extensions. I don't think parliament would allow no deal, which I think just leaves an 11th hour revocation of article 50, however that may be brought about. My feeling is that we're 60-40 in terms of revocation/hard leave.

Kim Wrong Un said:
The whole thing is a national disgrace but perhaps something good will come out of it in the longer term, maybe some much-needed humility, maybe a more modest, chilled-out Scandinavian-style mentality will eventually emerge - but the journey to that will be brutal.
Click to expand...
I agree with you and I'm more coming round to the idea of a hard Brexit for the reasons you mention. I would feel desperately sorry for the people who fought against it but it would also be a lesson to those people, probably a majority, who whine about being bored of Brexit or who are too lazy or stupid to engage with politics, who think warnings about Brexit is just millennium bugism, or who have wilfully and wantonly lied and cheated to get their ideological prize. Unfortunately it will be those who can least afford it who will again pay the price, as the always do.
 
in theory that makes sense Timmi - and she is notorious for breaking promises - but I just get the impression that after 3 years hell trying to get this thing through, it's become her holy grail. I just can't see her calling the whole thing off. I think she would prefer no-deal if that's what it takes... which is madness, but there's all this personal pride and vanity which she has invested in it
 
TimmiT said:
Almost all the Brexiter clichés in one post! Veiled threats of violence, personal attacks on opponents, blaming everyone else for the failure of Brexit while failing to realise that Brexit is itself is the problem and trying to portray a narrow winning margin for a Brexit that was officially campaigned on as "soft" as a mandate for a ruinous hard Brexit. All we're missing are some vacuous slogans like "Brexit means Brexit" or "will of the people" and we'd have the full house!

The only consensus in Parliament is to avoid a no deal Brexit and the further we go without a deal the more likely revocation becomes, which I now think is the most likely option.
Click to expand...
Not when its the default option its not. And not when she said we will leave on 29th march! And not since she said no deal is better than a bad deal. They have failed. They should all be on suspended pay until its sorted.

The mps are to blame they have got us into this shit. How can you blame the public? We had a vote, its down to them to have a plan.

Parliament is rotten to the core. Whoever votes for either red or blue in the next GE needs to give there head a wobble, bunch of clowns who are just as bad as each other
 
Last edited:
If it's no-deal, we DO face long queues at immigration (probably that one desk on arrival) whilst our passports are checked and possibly stamped there could be queues outside the terminal if two or three planes from the UK land together. Grrr.
 
It's a Google translation of a French newspaper, what are you thinking about it, about the driving license, the 3 months visa, etc...?

"
And for the people? One of the first visible consequences for UK and European consumers is roaming, which is the ability to use the network of a mobile phone operator abroad. The service, which is currently free for consumers in the EU, would generate costs for travelers crossing the Channel or the Irish border in case of no deal.

The same goes for the use of payment cards, which is expected to incur additional charges, while banking procedures will be "slower", according to London. In the EU, investment bank clients based in the UK will no longer be able to use their financial services. Many institutions, however, have already established subsidiaries on the continent to avoid disruption.

More paperwork
Thousands of companies importing or exporting to the UK should learn to fill out new customs declarations and may be subject to new taxes.

About two-thirds of UK companies have taken a "no deal" approach, and 80% say they are "ready" for a Brexit "without agreement or transition", compared to 50% in January, according to a survey published by Bank of England on March 21st.

The United Kingdom has also announced the establishment of a system of protected geographical indications for food products such as Scottish whiskey or Stilton cheese, so far recognized by European labels. The government has advised producers to apply for such protective status with the EU.

Online shopping, holidays ...
Consumers who buy online would see their costs increase because parcels delivered from the continent will no longer be able to claim a reduced VAT.

Britons on holiday in Europe may also need to obtain an international driving license as their "might not be valid anymore".

As for the transport of domestic animals, it would be framed by stricter health rules.

Disturbed transport
In case of no deal, British and European airlines will lose the automatic right to operate flights between the EU and the UK. Faced with the risk of chaos at airports, the British and European authorities are considering granting each other temporary permissions to airlines to allow the maintenance of air links.

A similar arrangement should concern the Eurostar train service and the other rail operators, as well as road transport.

British citizens traveling to the European Union will be subject to enhanced controls and their stays limited to 90 days.

To avoid the chaos and traffic jams near the ports, facing the reestablishment of controls, London has signed contracts with ferry companies to strengthen links with the continent, hoping to smooth traffic. Government does not expect food shortages but is considering less choice in perishable goods"
 
TimmiT said:
I don't think you understand the meaning of the word "consensus". MPs voted by 321 to 278 not to leave the EU with no deal.
Click to expand...

Consensus, or not, it is the default option.

Vote or not, in just over a week, without any change or agreement, we will drop out of the EU with no deal, regardless of the vote. It's the legal default.
 
All eyes on Corbyn - he basically wants OUT but doesn't want to be associated with it. Spineless coward or tactical genius? - only time will tell. Either way, ball's in his court now...
 
Ikoda said:
Consensus, or not, it is the default option.

Vote or not, in just over a week, without any change or agreement, we will drop out of the EU with no deal, regardless of the vote. It's the legal default.
Click to expand...
Yes, but my point was that the only consensus in Parliament is to not leave without a deal and my reasoning above was that this makes it a bit more likely than not that at the 11th hour MPs would force a revocation because it would be the only option left to avoid it.
 
TimmiT said:
Yes, but my point was that the only consensus in Parliament is to not leave without a deal and my reasoning above was that this makes it a bit more likely than not that at the 11th hour MPs would force a revocation because it would be the only option left to avoid it.
Click to expand...

I don't think they will (sadly), most of them don't want to upset the will of the people so will let us drop off.
 
TimmiT said:
I don't think you understand the meaning of the word "consensus". MPs voted by 321 to 278 not to leave the EU with no deal.
Click to expand...
You clearly don't understand that its not legally binding. And before you say, neither is the referendum that is besides the point. You don't call a referendum then ignore the result. What would be the point, after 3 years of negotiating, millions of arguments, splitting the country, etc etc
 
Last edited:
Kim Wrong Un said:
All eyes on Corbyn - he basically wants OUT but doesn't want to be associated with it. Spineless coward or tactical genius? - only time will tell. Either way, ball's in his court now...
Click to expand...
The bloke isn't even the PM yet hes gonna be calling the shots. Running to the enemy to push a dreadfull deal through, makes a mockery of the "no deal is better than bad deal" waffle she gave.

Spineless coward is correct presuming you're on about May
 
Last edited:
Hang on...there should have been cross party collaboration from the very start. Yes it's late but do we really have an issue with it?
 
Nostalgic said:
You clearly don't understand that its not legally binding. And before you say, neither is the referendum that is besides the point. You don't call a referendum then ignore the result. What would be the point, after 3 years of negotiating, millions of arguments, splitting the country, etc etc
Click to expand...
The referendum result was not for a hard Brexit, it was for a managed Brexit with a trade deal in place.
 
lee111s said:
The referendum was not campaigned in a way which really told people what it meant.
Click to expand...
That's as maybe, but this Twitter thread explains very nicely what people most likely voted for, based on what they believed at the time, and why. Those that now claim the people who voted out, voted to be out, deal or no deal, are simply incorrect, many of them wilfully so.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top