snowychap Posted December 2, 2018 Share Posted December 2, 2018 (edited) 7 minutes ago, bickster said: Yes that one but let's be honest, she's not alone in being a clueless having done the job, in fact, it seems to be part of the job description these days No intent to detract from the point you were making. Indeed it was to reinforce just how aghast we ought to be with her position. Edited December 2, 2018 by snowychap 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bickster Posted December 2, 2018 Moderator Share Posted December 2, 2018 3 minutes ago, snowychap said: No intent to detract from the point you were making. Didn't think you were tbh 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snowychap Posted December 2, 2018 Share Posted December 2, 2018 41 minutes ago, bickster said: Didn't think you were tbh Sorry. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StefanAVFC Posted December 2, 2018 Share Posted December 2, 2018 53 minutes ago, snowychap said: No intent to detract from the point you were making. Indeed it was to reinforce just how aghast we ought to be with her position. 49 minutes ago, bickster said: Didn't think you were tbh 8 minutes ago, snowychap said: Sorry. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NurembergVillan Posted December 3, 2018 Moderator Share Posted December 3, 2018 Looks like @StefanAVFC is getting closer to his answer on post-Brexit rights. These arseholes are trying to ensure there aren't any. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StefanAVFC Posted December 3, 2018 Share Posted December 3, 2018 Urgh worst government ever Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bickster Posted December 3, 2018 Moderator Share Posted December 3, 2018 The Legal Advice appears to have leaked Quote —Legal note–not for general distribution The Withdrawal Agreement: Legal and Governance Aspects Part One: Overview The Withdrawal Agreement (WA) can only come into force if it is concluded (ratified) by the EU and ratified by the UK before 29 March 2019. EU ratification requires the agreement of a super qualified majority in the Council and the 1 consent of the European Parliament. No individual Member State has a veto. However, Member States are very likely to have a veto over any Future Arrangements Agreement (FAA), creating the possibility that a Member State disgruntled at the WA could decide, in the future, to veto the FAA. Agreement of the WA on the EU side can be challenged by a Member State or an EU institution that considers that its terms are incompatible with the EU Treaties. 1 Much much more on link Link To PDF 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
desensitized43 Posted December 3, 2018 Share Posted December 3, 2018 6 minutes ago, bickster said: The Legal Advice appears to have leaked Much much more on link Link To PDF If true this government has well and truly stitched up the next one and the people or NI and Gibraltar. I wonder what the Spanish price would be if they had a veto over the economic future of the country... When the process for this began I used to think that May's "No deal is better than a bad deal" line was complete hogwash and that No deal was the worst possible outcome...but we're all being sold down the river here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chindie Posted December 3, 2018 VT Supporter Share Posted December 3, 2018 No deal is still the worst possible outcome. It's just that this deal is also completely shit. And was always going to be with the priorities the government set. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StefanAVFC Posted December 3, 2018 Share Posted December 3, 2018 The issue is her red lines. Or sorry, her red line. She won't budge on Freedom of Movement which apparently we voted to end (we didn't) and that completely prevents us from getting sort of decent deal. it's all her fault tbh. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mjmooney Posted December 3, 2018 VT Supporter Share Posted December 3, 2018 A second referendum looms. But what will the question be? If it's "Theresa's deal OR no deal", then most of us may as well not vote - it's like being asked how you'd like to be executed. The alternative is a three way choice: (a) No deal (b) Theresa's deal (c) On reflection, it was a stupid idea, FFS call it off now But that would cause outrage among the brexiteers, because even if they had an overall majority same as last time, their vote would inevitably be split between (a) and (b), and (c) would stroll it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chindie Posted December 3, 2018 VT Supporter Share Posted December 3, 2018 If a second referendum happens, which I'm not totally in favour of (though understand it's use, it gives parliament the card to act a little less brainlessly, if they can set aside their own ambitions for a second...), if it's a 2 way question of 'May Deal or No Deal', all Remainers have to support the May deal. The May deal is bad, but No Deal is a complete shitshow. May's deal there is the least bad option. It's still crap, but it's not outright insanity. Of course if it's a 3 way question with a full Remain option, whilst still not being in favour of referendums, I'll take it. Assuming the country has come to it's senses, which is a big assumption Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark Albrighton Posted December 3, 2018 VT Supporter Share Posted December 3, 2018 11 minutes ago, mjmooney said: A second referendum looms. But what will the question be? If it's "Theresa's deal OR no deal", then most of us may as well not vote - it's like being asked how you'd like to be executed. The alternative is a three way choice: (a) No deal (b) Theresa's deal (c) On reflection, it was a stupid idea, FFS call it off now But that would cause outrage among the brexiteers, because even if they had an overall majority same as last time, their vote would inevitably be split between (a) and (b), and (c) would stroll it. How about adding option (d) in the spirit of fairness? (d) On reflection, it was a stupid idea, FFS call it off now + May, Boris, Gove, Farrage et all to be tarred and feathered. That should even it up. 3 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
desensitized43 Posted December 3, 2018 Share Posted December 3, 2018 20 minutes ago, Shropshire Lad said: How about adding option (d) in the spirit of fairness? (d) On reflection, it was a stupid idea, FFS call it off now + May, Boris, Gove, Farrage et all to be tarred and feathered. That should even it up. Now that's a referendum worth having! We should never have been given the choice to start with. Decisions like this where you have to look at the economics, the political implications with our neighbours and dependent territories, the complexity of disentangling decades of legislation, are why we pay people to make these decisions for us. They're paid to sit there and read 500+ page documents and more about such things. The everyman on the street was never going to be clever enough to weigh the pros and cons of this, which left us vulnerable to the hate-mongers like Farage and JRM. It was always going to come down to "how many brown faces I see in Tesco" wasn't it!? That being said, the result can't be ignored as it's done now but democracy doesn't begin and end in June 2016 and now everyone is a little clearer on what the options are it's time we did this again. If we can stack the deck in favour of a 'remain' by splitting the raving racists vote share then so be it. Those people shouldn't be allowed to breathe the same air as the rest of us so why should their vote count the same. I've spent the last 2 and a half years being thoroughly ashamed of this country. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WhatAboutTheFinish Posted December 3, 2018 Share Posted December 3, 2018 41 minutes ago, mjmooney said: A second referendum looms. But what will the question be? If it's "Theresa's deal OR no deal", then most of us may as well not vote - it's like being asked how you'd like to be executed. The alternative is a three way choice: (a) No deal (b) Theresa's deal (c) On reflection, it was a stupid idea, FFS call it off now But that would cause outrage among the brexiteers, because even if they had an overall majority same as last time, their vote would inevitably be split between (a) and (b), and (c) would stroll it. How about this but with a Single Transferable Vote, that should at least spice it up a little! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snowychap Posted December 3, 2018 Share Posted December 3, 2018 (edited) 58 minutes ago, mjmooney said: A second referendum looms. But what will the question be? If it's "Theresa's deal OR no deal", then most of us may as well not vote - it's like being asked how you'd like to be executed. The alternative is a three way choice: (a) No deal (b) Theresa's deal (c) On reflection, it was a stupid idea, FFS call it off now But that would cause outrage among the brexiteers, because even if they had an overall majority same as last time, their vote would inevitably be split between (a) and (b), and (c) would stroll it. The People's Vote roadmap (pdf link and link to page with pdf link) has the following: Quote The question: ... The various options for consideration have been summarised by Meg Russell, Alan Renwick, and Jess Sargeant at the UCL Constitution Unit in the following way: Single Yes/No question - Accept negotiated deal v Reject negotiated deal Single two option question - Negotiated deal v Remain or Negotiated deal v No Deal or No Deal v Remain Single multi-option referendum - Negotiated deal v No deal v Remain Two question referendum - 1) Accept negotiated deal v Reject negotiated deal and if deal rejected then 2) Remain v No deal or 1) Leave v Remain and if Leave then 2) Negotiated deal v No deal I wonder whether, should the vote be lost by the government next week, May could suddenly decide to propose a second referendum with the top option, a yes or no on the WA (which is effectively Negotiated deal v No deal but wouldn't be phrased like that). If there were to be a second referendum then I think it ought to be the one I've underlined and put in bold above. I'm still very apprehensive about a second referendum for the reasons I've already made a few weeks ago but if one were to happen then I think it would also necessarily require a couple of things: A50 extension specifically to ensure enough time to have the votes take place (and all the things needed for this like discussion in Parliament, the passing of a statute, the Electoral Commission decision about the question and campaigning) and also a proper plan for what happens next for each potential outcome. Might we not have problems now with an A50 extension? Surely it only needs one country to demur and the idea would be a no go? Edited December 3, 2018 by snowychap Spelling and things Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StefanAVFC Posted December 3, 2018 Share Posted December 3, 2018 There was a very good thread by Ian Dunt on Twitter last week, I'll try to dig it out. The big difficult question he was having trouble with was: If there's a 2nd ref, should no deal be on the ballot at all? It's a question of pure democracy against insanity. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
desensitized43 Posted December 3, 2018 Share Posted December 3, 2018 Just now, StefanAVFC said: There was a very good thread by Ian Dunt on Twitter last week, I'll try to dig it out. The big difficult question he was having trouble with was: If there's a 2nd ref, should no deal be on the ballot at all? It's a question of pure democracy against insanity. Putting it on the ballot denies the "liars and bullshitters" the cover they had with the question last time so it has to be on there. Otherwise, we'll have Farage et al saying if people they vote out they don't have to leave the common market, the EEA or can "do a norway" etc only to turn round after the fact to claim no deal is the "will of the people" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StefanAVFC Posted December 3, 2018 Share Posted December 3, 2018 (edited) But what if it wins? They have the mandate to destroy the country and people will continue to follow them to the land of milk and honey. No deal is an absolute disaster. It's why it's so difficult and Ian's thread above is so good. Edited December 3, 2018 by StefanAVFC Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
desensitized43 Posted December 3, 2018 Share Posted December 3, 2018 1 minute ago, StefanAVFC said: But what if it wins? They have the mandate to destroy the country and people will continue to follow them to the land of milk and honey. No deal is an absolute disaster. It wouldn't win. I don't accept that 17.4 million voted for no deal last time and would again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts