Brexit - The UK leaves the EU

[baldgye]

How the Europeans see Brexit
https://www.ft.com/content/110207f2-cea2-11e9-b018-ca4456540ea6

How do European decision makers see Brexit now? I’ve asked politicians, diplomats and business groups across the EU and found them remarkably united around a tough stance towards Britain.

They won’t give in to Boris Johnson’s demands to renegotiate a deal, but nor do they want Britain’s anti-no-deal forces to delay Brexit.

Very few Europeans are still open to the UK’s staying in the EU, and most dread a potential second British referendum. Here are my conclusions:

I can’t paste the contents at the article because GTP ***** the bed.

But basically, Europe is done with the U.K. has little issue with accepting no-deal and is largely against an extension. Which would make BoJo's plan meaningless and our only real way of averting catastrophe be to remain or become a lesser member under TM's deal.

 

[TenEightyOne]

A deal has been struck overnight which will prevent the anticipated 100-motion filibuster in the Other Place, yesterday's bill will (probably) be presented for Royal Assent on Monday.

EDIT: More on @Famine's Fartage/JoBo theory:

 

[Touring Mars]

One question I have, @Touring Mars .. if we did get another extension, what would the chances of a) Scotland getting Indyref2, and b) Voting for it, and c) is it thought this would leave them in the EU by default, or would they have to apply?

Difficult to say - but I've posted some points in here:

https://www.gtplanet.net/forum/threads/scottish-independence.284556/

 

[MatskiMonk]

Boris's brother, Jo, Tory MP for Orpington, has quit the party, saying he's "torn between family and national interest".

 

[Touring Mars]

Boris's brother, Jo, Tory MP for Orpington, has quit the party, saying he wishes to spend less time with his family.

 

[baldgye]

Boris's brother, Jo, Tory MP for Orpington, has quit the party, saying he wishes to spend less time with his family.

Can you blame him?

 

[Touring Mars]

Ironic advertisement in today's Financial Times...

 

[PeterJB]

So Corbyn has been doing nothing but cry out for a general election for the past two years, and when the opportunity finally arises, not only does he abstain from voting, but also convinces the entire party to do so because they know it would kill them off. Surely this is grounds for a vote of no confidence?

 

[baldgye]

So Corbyn has been doing nothing but cry out for a general election for the past two years, and when the opportunity finally arises, not only does he abstain from voting, but also convinces the entire party to do so because they know it would kill them off. Surely this is grounds for a vote of no confidence?

He doesn't want a GE now because Parliament has the ability to (in theory) stop no-deal.
If a GE happened not only would he and his party be unable to do anything but they’d be back to where they where when TM was PM... there isn’t much point in a GE now unless you’re BoJo and can push for a majority.

And! If there was a GE now, who ever was elected would be so prior to Leaving and so any leader would then have to deal with the fallout of Brexit!

 

[Famine]

He doesn't want a GE now because

It's mainly because Labour will be gutted. Boris's ratings are climbing, and the more 'traitors' he sacks, the more it climbs; the forecast outcome for a GE two days ago was a Conservative majority of 70+.

Corbyn is, at heart, a leaver (it's a large, governmental organisation, and he's generally against those because something something yoke of tyranny; it's why he's buddies with all the best terrorists). He just wants his people to be in control of the process, and will do his best to block everything.


Insanely, Parliament has voted against every possibility. It's even twice voted against a no deal, which is pretty odd as that's what's going to happen whether it likes it or not unless it comes up with something it doesn't vote against.

 

[MatskiMonk]

So Corbyn has been doing nothing but cry out for a general election for the past two years, and when the opportunity finally arises, not only does he abstain from voting, but also convinces the entire party to do so because they know it would kill them off. Surely this is grounds for a vote of no confidence?

No confidence in who, Corbyn? Motions of no confidence are triggered against her Majesties government, not people in parliament who oppose it. It'd be down to his party to remove him, and since he's probably actually acting against a vote that would weaken his party, I'm not sure why they would (at least in terms of this specific vote)

 

[baldgye]

It's mainly because Labour will be gutted. Boris's ratings are climbing, and the more 'traitors' he sacks, the more it climbs; the forecast outcome for a GE two days ago was a Conservative majority of 70+.

Corbyn is, at heart, a leaver (it's a large, governmental organisation, and he's generally against those because something something yoke of tyranny; it's why he's buddies with all the best terrorists). He just wants his people to be in control of the process, and will do his best to block everything.

Agreed, I made the point earlier that a GE would only ever favour BoJo. This is the closest he's ever going to get to being leader so he's not just going to give that up now.

To be honest, which ever way a GE went now it would be disastrous for us (the British people), because we'd have one of the two parties without a leader. Tories looses a GE now and it could decimate what's left, boosting the far-right Brexit Party into a legitimate party and then forming another smaller more central Tory party (both splitting their support bases). Or Labour put on another total ****-show of trying to elect a new leader. All the while the winning party does what ever the **** it wants...


I can't see this problem going away or being resolved. No-deal will do so much damage that it'll change nothing and remainers such as myself will be angry and bitter. The deal pisses everyone off and no-brexit makes leavers bitter and angry.

 

[PeterJB]

No confidence in who, Corbyn? Motions of no confidence are triggered against her Majesties government, not people in parliament who oppose it. It'd be down to his party to remove him, and since he's probably actually acting against a vote that would weaken his party, I'm not sure why they would (at least in terms of this specific vote)

Didn't Labour put one against him not long after becoming Leader of the Opposition?

 

[TenEightyOne]

So Corbyn has been doing nothing but cry out for a general election for the past two years, and when the opportunity finally arises, not only does he abstain from voting, but also convinces the entire party to do so because they know it would kill them off.

I think it's more about the timing - the Conservatives resist attempts to call a GE until the exact time when they can kill an unfavourable bill with it. The opposition to Boris's GE plan is based on that more than anything.

 

[MatskiMonk]

Didn't Labour put one against him not long after becoming Leader of the Opposition?

Yes, but as I understand it, that was only an issue within the Labour party, and not within her Majesties government. So again, they could probably try and oust him as leader via a ballot within the party (as before), but why would they?

edit: just to be clear, all I'm saying is that a vote of no confidence within a party not in government, isn't the same as a vote of no confidence against the government, which then means a new government must be formed, or a GE called.

 

[Touring Mars]

Surely this is grounds for a vote of no confidence?

Why? 242 out of 245 Labour MPs did not vote in favour of an election, in line with Corbyn - how does that mean Corbyn doesn't have the support of his party?!

So Corbyn has been doing nothing but cry out for a general election for the past two years, and when the opportunity finally arises, not only does he abstain from voting, but also convinces the entire party to do so because they know it would kill them off.

It is totally disingenuous to believe that calling an election right now has any other purpose than acting as a trojan horse to deliver a No Deal Brexit - that is obvious.

Labour, Lib Dems and the SNP would all love to have a GE, but, to their credit, they have seen this for what it is, and are putting the national interest first by ensuring a No Deal Brexit is blocked prior to any election taking place.

 

[Liquid]

Yes well, we all wanted a sovereign parliament (didn't we?) and now we've got one. Whether we like it or not the government isn't doing its own thing and letting the House know later.

The Fixed Term Parliaments Act was introduced by a Conservative government so... deal with it.

 

[baldgye]

Yes well, we all wanted a sovereign parliament (didn't we?) and now we've got one. Whether we like it or not the government isn't doing its own thing and letting the House know later.

The Fixed Term Parliaments Act was introduced by a Conservative government so... deal with it.

erm, I think the only people with an issue are it are the ERG and BoJo

 

[Tired Tyres]

erm, I think the only people with an issue are it are the ERG and BoJo

And anyone who wants a functional Government.

 

[baldgye]

And anyone who wants a functional Government.

We haven't had one of those for the past three years?

 

[MatskiMonk]

Jacob Rees-Meme has announced another vote on a General Election for Monday.

 

[Dotini]

And anyone who wants a functional Government.

Agreed, a functional executive is probably a very bad thing, if the US is anything to go by. IMO, even the otherwise able and intelligent Blair got too deeply into his role as US poodle. He's the one at the root of all your most immediate problems, multiple wars of regime change followed by immigration woes hopelessly dividing your society.

Remember, after Brexit, you will fall even more deeply into our lap, as well as that of China. *licks chops*

 

[Danoff]

 

[Liquid]

Agreed, a functional executive is probably a very bad thing, if the US is anything to go by. IMO, even the otherwise able and intelligent Blair got too deeply into his role as US poodle. He's the one at the root of all your most immediate problems, multiple wars of regime change followed by immigration woes hopelessly dividing your society.

Remember, after Brexit, you will fall even more deeply into our lap, as well as that of China. *licks chops*

Come on, get it right, Russia is the one lapping up the dissent in Europe.

But I suppose you in the USA would never have any experience with Russian destabilising tactics.

 

[baldgye]

Come on, get it right, Russia is the one lapping up the dissent in Europe.

The rise of the right in Europe and the destabilisation of European economies leads to a crisis in their respective health services which gives an in for American heath companies/services. This is what America want and this is what they are pushing to try and get a foothold in within the UK in a no-deal/post-brexit world where the NHS is no longer viable.

 

[Dotini]

Come on, get it right, Russia is the one lapping up the dissent in Europe.

But I suppose you in the USA would never have any experience with Russian destabilising tactics.

You are never going to bend over for Russia, though you might trade with them. But your most natural trade partners after Brexit would be us, China and Japan.

 

[Danoff]

The rise of the right in Europe and the destabilisation of European economies leads to a crisis in their respective health services which gives an in for American heath companies/services. This is what America want and this is what they are pushing to try and get a foothold in within the UK in a no-deal/post-brexit world where the NHS is no longer viable.

Remember, after Brexit, you will fall even more deeply into our lap, as well as that of China. *licks chops*

But your most natural trade partners after Brexit would be us, China and Japan.

Trade is not a bad thing. Trade benefits both parties. Why is it "falling into our lap"?

 

[Danoff]

Doh. Nothing here.

 

[Dotini]

Trade is not a bad thing. Trade benefits both parties. Why is it "falling into our lap"?

Trade is wonderful thing! Especially when our trading partner at a 'slight' disadvantage. But we are not done with wars of regime change, and the UK is vital to NATO expansion, tub-thumping at the UN, and their excellent secret services.

 

[Danoff]

Especially when our trading partner at a 'slight' disadvantage.

Please explain in detail what disadvantage they have in trade and why and how it will be used against them.