The now-enacted will of (some of) the people

[Amsterdam_Neil_D]

1 hour ago, OutByEaster? said:

I think it would be fair to ask the EU to extend the deadline on the triggering of A50 until the UK parliament has come to agreement on the way forward. Do you think they'd agree to 2055?

Push the boat out so to speak and ask for 21:00 so we can all watch the News in peace. 

[blandy]

1 hour ago, LondonLax said:

I thought I saw an EU type saying the EU would do the UK a favour and extend A50 in the event of a GE to allow the UK some time to get their house in order before rejoining the negotiation table.

Having said that, I couldn’t say if the offer still stands this late in the day or if the person I read about making the offer actually had the authority to do so. 

Let’s have a look at how that might pan out. Firstly there’s the legal side. The text is black and white. 2 years after triggering it, we’re out. We can revoke it beforehand, but not after. The EU and the UK would both need to agree to any extension and overcome any legal case brought (say by some hard Brexit throbber). There’s no time for such a case to be heard...so in the absence of a ruling it’s very unchartered waters. For BOTH the EU and UK to agree to extend, assuming no legal hurdles, as we have seen, the EU has just told May to do one on trying to reopen negotiations. Labour’s got the same issue of wanting single market etc. benefits without abiding by the rules. Maybe the EU would contemplate reopening and extending for Corbyn, but he’d have to change his stance, too. There’s also the difficulty of EU parliament elections coming up. How do they allocate seats for an unknown number of member nations, because the total seats would be split between TBD countries (27/28). Major problem. It’s a clusterpork, enabled by both parties, mainly the tories, but the opposition is utterly useless.

[LondonLax]

Ah yes, I remember the EU elections being mentioned as a hard deadline to have this all resolved. 

[HanoiVillan]

3 hours ago, blandy said:

It pretty much is off the table, but let’s assume/ pretend you’re right and that May loses the vote on Jan 14th. Now there will also be votes on 6 amendments, as yet to be chosen, but likely to include a Norway type option and a people’s vote option. At that point, at that moment of voting Labour needs to have a position. It needs one now. At the time of the vote a GE remains a remote possibility. So what does Labour and Corbyn do? His position is exposed as as bonkers as that of May. The flakey dreaming idiot cannot handle the real world. Pipe dreams are his thing. Anyway back to the timing, say you’re right and May loses, and thanks to Corbyn’s extreme ambivalence no option, no amendments get accepted. Say there’s shortly afterwards  a VONC. Say the DUP. reverse their detestation of Corbyn and his chum’s united Ireland outlook (they won’t, there’s more chance of JRM becoming a remainer), but say your point overcomes that delusion and May loses a VOC. it’s now mid Jan. there has to be at least 6 weeks election run up, realistically it’ll be closer to 7 or 8 weeks. Corbyn isn’t PM yet, May is. so an election happens in early is March. What’s he campaigning on?  It’s clearly not remain, it can’t credibly be a People’s vote, because as you’ve said, that comes behind his dream of Labour doing a jobs first (Pah!) Brexit. How he’s going to get that with maybe  a week till we crash out? By cancelling article 50 is the only way to even start that. Once/ if he cancels it, then he either has to U turn on his Yes to Brexit, or he has to re-invoke A50 to stay true to his beliefs (mad as they are on Europe). He’s as dead as May, if not more so, either way.

His deluded claimed plan cannot work, even if we ignore the humongous unlikelihood of the DUP voting for Corbyn. 

Edit. Apparently if the govt loses a VOC there is only a GE if it then loses another one within 14 days, so the timetable is even worse. Corbyn’s alleged “plan” is even less credible than I thought .

You can't have it both ways. Either there's no time, or there is some. If there's no time, and the EU won't agree to an Article 50 extension, then yes, you're right, a pre-exit election won't happen. However, neither will a second referendum, yet you seem to be annoyed that Corbyn hasn't clarified his position on that. I don't understand why, if you think it's re-arranging deck chairs on the Titanic. If you're right, and there's no time, then the very simple conclusion following that is that there are three choices, May's WA, a disorderly Brexit or revoking Article 50. However, we know that the third won't happen with May as PM, so it's really two, and you need to start talking about that choice and not bother with talking about a second referendum. 

On the other hand, if the EU are prepared to extend Article 50 (which I'm very sure will be a political question not a legal one) then all options remain on the table, and hoping for a VONC is not a 'pipe dream', but just an ambition that might not succeed. 

[blandy]

Just seen this on the timing on twitter HV. The thread underneath links to the detail. 

 

[blandy]

7 minutes ago, HanoiVillan said:

the very simple conclusion following that is that there are three choices, May's WA, a disorderly Brexit or revoking Article 50. However, we know that the third won't happen with May as PM, so it's really two, and you need to start talking about that choice and not bother with talking about a second referendum. 

Maybe I’ve confused you. I’m critiquing Corbyn’s position, not espousing my own position. Corbyn’s position is ludicrous. May’s position is maniacal.  Me, I’d revoke the ****, instigate a Republic, overthrow the surgery and kidnap Dr. Mopp......but I’m not pm. I’m a bloke in a pub. 

[bickster]

This is the dimwitted buffoonery were are dealing with at the very top level of left thinking in the UK. Here we have the General Secretary of the TUC (who?) suggesting we do something that isn't f***ing possible

F***ing arseclown

[snowychap]

55 minutes ago, HanoiVillan said:

if the EU are prepared to extend Article 50 (which I'm very sure will be a political question not a legal one)

You're obviously right that the question would be a political one, in that it's a question of whether the Council unanimously agree to an extension.

It is also surely right that there are legal complications to any extension, not least where it would put the UK and the EU in terms of EU elections.

[bickster]

1 hour ago, HanoiVillan said:

You can't have it both ways. Either there's no time, or there is some. If there's no time, and the EU won't agree to an Article 50 extension, then yes, you're right, a pre-exit election won't happen. However, neither will a second referendum, yet you seem to be annoyed that Corbyn hasn't clarified his position on that. I don't understand why, if you think it's re-arranging deck chairs on the Titanic. If you're right, and there's no time, then the very simple conclusion following that is that there are three choices, May's WA, a disorderly Brexit or revoking Article 50. However, we know that the third won't happen with May as PM, so it's really two, and you need to start talking about that choice and not bother with talking about a second referendum. 

On the other hand, if the EU are prepared to extend Article 50 (which I'm very sure will be a political question not a legal one) then all options remain on the table, and hoping for a VONC is not a 'pipe dream', but just an ambition that might not succeed. 

The EU have already said they will agree to an extension of A50 if a referendum is called, they've been clear on that and said it multiple times. They've pretty much said it's about the only reason they'll agree (or possibly a General Election where membership is a key issue but being as both main parties are Brexit Parties then that's ruled our automatically).

The "There's no time for a referendum" is bunk, the EU have already said they'll accommodate it

[blandy]

9 minutes ago, bickster said:

The "There's no time for a referendum" is bunk, the EU have already said they'll accommodate it

I didn’t know that. Thanks. It’s a glimmer of hope I suppose. 

[HanoiVillan]

54 minutes ago, bickster said:

The EU have already said they will agree to an extension of A50 if a referendum is called, they've been clear on that and said it multiple times. They've pretty much said it's about the only reason they'll agree (or possibly a General Election where membership is a key issue but being as both main parties are Brexit Parties then that's ruled our automatically).

The "There's no time for a referendum" is bunk, the EU have already said they'll accommodate it

I think the idea that they would agree an extension for another referendum, but not for a GE, is a load of bunk to be honest, but I sense I'm not going to persuade you of that so we'll just have to differ. 

Regardless, you are simply bringing the circle back around to yesterday's conversation, which is that there is no majority for having a second referendum in the HoC regardless, and there won't be one without a GE, so round we go again. 

[bickster]

2 minutes ago, HanoiVillan said:

I think the idea that they would agree an extension for another referendum, but not for a GE, is a load of bunk to be honest,

2

That's not what I said

EDIT: When May's deal is canned there will only be 2 options remaining (unless you are a F***witted Labour MP) - referendum or No Deal. There is leven ess appetite in the HoC for No Deal

In fact if we look at what's just been said, there's no appetite for any of the options, which can only mean it NEEDS to go back to that Will bloke

[HanoiVillan]

Just now, bickster said:

That's not what I said

eh?

You said: 'They've pretty much said it's [a second referendum] about the only reason they'll agree (or possibly a General Election where membership is a key issue but being as both main parties are Brexit Parties then that's ruled our automatically)'

What part am I misunderstanding?

[bickster]

3 minutes ago, HanoiVillan said:

eh?

You said: 'They've pretty much said it's [a second referendum] about the only reason they'll agree (or possibly a General Election where membership is a key issue but being as both main parties are Brexit Parties then that's ruled our automatically)'

What part am I misunderstanding?

 

That bit

[HanoiVillan]

4 minutes ago, bickster said:

That bit

Okay, well I don't agree. 

[ml1dch]

6 minutes ago, bickster said:

That bit

The long and the short of it is that they are generally prepared to be accommodating to things that have a benefit for them. 

So a referendum between the agreed deal and staying? Fine, they'll make time. Between the agreed deal and the crash-out favoured by idiots? No chance, what's in it for them?

A general election with two sides arguing which of their fantasy renegotiations would be better? Nope. A general election with one manifesto clearly backing the withdrawal agreement and the other clearly backing remain? They'll do what they can to make it work.

The current Labour position of "we want an election to be in power to go back and renegotiate the withdrawal agreement" - not a hope in hell they'll extend anything. 

(I think this is broadly in line with what you've been saying)

[StefanAVFC]

interesting that 3 Tories have publicly stated they will resign the whip if no deal becomes policy. Even with the DUP backing May (which you can’t see with no deal) it only requires 7 Tory MPs to resign the whip for no deal to be effectively dead. 

[Chindie]

No Deal won't become Tory Party policy, so it's a slightly mealy mouthed way of looking principled.

[bickster]

1 minute ago, Chindie said:

No Deal won't become Tory Party policy, so it's a slightly mealy mouthed way of looking principled.

Or it's a push back against May's attempts at back my deal or it's No Deal

May is trying to strongarm people to her deal with a My Deal or No Deal stance

They are pushing back saying, No Deal and we just quit the party.

I don't think there's anything mealy-mouthed about it. They are essentially saying, you can only push party loyalty so far and we will act in the national interest if No Deal becomes policy.

[bickster]

25 minutes ago, HanoiVillan said:

Okay, well I don't agree. 

Which bit don't you agree with? Labour being a party of Brexit? The EU allowing an extension for a GE that is fought along Leave / Remain lines only?

I'm not sure how anyone can disagree with those tbh