Chindie Posted November 23, 2018 VT Supporter Share Posted November 23, 2018 There's been a lot of talk that the 'plan' is to basically allow the deal to be voted down, let the country flirt with no deal, have the economy shit itself and then have MPs panic vote the deal through. Inspired by the US 'TARP' debacle, the Troubled Asset Relief Program, which was similarly unpopular and failed to get through Congress, leading to the market plummeting and forcing the program to be accepted with token changes shortly afterwards. A monumentally stupid plan, but it's May's plan, so of course it's stupid. But she will do anything to get rid of those foreigners. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bickster Posted November 23, 2018 Moderator Share Posted November 23, 2018 This opinion is being said more and more by those on the Brexiteer side of the debate Quote Former Brexit Secretary says it would be better to stay in the EU than accept Theresa May’s Brexit deal. Dominic Raab tells the Today Programme that the planned EU withdrawal agreement would leave Britain with no say over customs and trade rules it would adhere to. His comments come as May struggles to secure support from her party for the deal. A Parliamentary vote on the withdrawal agreement is due at the start of December Read more at Buisness Insider (Australia) 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snowychap Posted November 23, 2018 Share Posted November 23, 2018 1 hour ago, LondonLax said: It’s hard to know how this will end but if no deal is off the table it will either be vote for minor variations on the current deal enough times until it passes or call the whole thing off and take stock. The problem is that these are not the options unless something manifestly changes. If the WA is rejected and no changes are made (the EU's stance appears to be firmly that they have no intention or will to do any more negotiating on the WA even with bods on their own side - Spain/France) then we leave on 29th March without any deal. Obviously, one may imagine that in such a scenario there may be a short extension to the A50 timeline but this still needs to happen. With the talk about the WA focussing on the backstop and the customs thing being UK wide, is it still the case that effectively casting NI aside is a way out of the backstop? If so then I could see a government led by a slightly different faction of the Tory party (maybe after a change next September) doing that in order to be able to ditch any agreed upon positions and still try to make the UK a Singapore-light. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snowychap Posted November 23, 2018 Share Posted November 23, 2018 23 minutes ago, bickster said: This opinion is being said more and more by those on the Brexiteer side of the debate I don't think this is being said because they are coming round to the idea of remaining in the EU. I think he's merely trying to shore up the section of people voting against the WA who would share his particular disappointment with this deal and perhaps to try and turn a few more cabinet heads. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bickster Posted November 23, 2018 Moderator Share Posted November 23, 2018 2 minutes ago, snowychap said: I don't think this is being said because they are coming round to the idea of remaining in the EU. I think he's merely trying to shore up the section of people voting against the WA who would share his particular disappointment with this deal and perhaps to try and turn a few more cabinet heads. I wasn't speculating as to why it's being said, just a comment that I'm seeing this line being trotted out more and more As it happens I tend to agree with your opinion, that is why it's being said. I also think, however, that it also has the opposite effect on as many if not more to make them more resolute to reject Brexit altogether and if the Brexiteer side are attempting to use this line, it's a sign of both desperation and a lack of ideas 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snowychap Posted November 23, 2018 Share Posted November 23, 2018 (edited) 18 minutes ago, bickster said: I wasn't speculating as to why it's being said, just a comment that I'm seeing this line being trotted out more and more As it happens I tend to agree with your opinion, that is why it's being said. I also think, however, that it also has the opposite effect on as many if not more to make them more resolute to reject Brexit altogether and if the Brexiteer side are attempting to use this line, it's a sign of both desperation and a lack of ideas Ah, fair enough. I also agree with you about it having the opposite effect on others. I guess it's either a case of them not thinking it through fully or not giving a shit. Both are equally plausible. Edited November 23, 2018 by snowychap 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andym Posted November 23, 2018 Share Posted November 23, 2018 May was asked directly by a radio caller if the deal will leave us better off than if we had stayed in the EU, a simple yes or no question. "it will be different...i believe we can build a better future outside the EU" Tells you all you need to know Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HanoiVillan Posted November 23, 2018 Share Posted November 23, 2018 37 minutes ago, andym said: May was asked directly by a radio caller if the deal will leave us better off than if we had stayed in the EU, a simple yes or no question. "it will be different...i believe we can build a better future outside the EU" Tells you all you need to know She's a former Bank of England economist who campaigned (however tepidly) for Remain. She knows full well that it's not a good idea; the point is that she has a] submerged that knowledge in order to achieve the 'greater' goal of becoming Prime Minister, and b] seized upon it as a chance to enact her key policy preference, which is for a lot less foreigners to be in the country. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chrisp65 Posted November 23, 2018 Share Posted November 23, 2018 It’s down to your understanding of better off. If better off means freedom of movement, economic prosperity, a health service, EU aid for poor areas. Then it’s the EU for you. If better off means clamping down on muslim paedo gangs with their burgundy passports. Then it’s leave. If better off means protected by a European army directed by a committee of French, Spanish and German suits, then it’s remain. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ml1dch Posted November 23, 2018 Share Posted November 23, 2018 40 minutes ago, chrisp65 said: If better off means protected by a European army directed by a committee of French, Spanish and German suits, then it’s remain. While I obviously get that it's posted in a remember-the-bad-bits-as-well way, I think that given they're currently being directed by Gavin Williamson I'd sooner take my chances with the technocrats. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bickster Posted November 23, 2018 Moderator Share Posted November 23, 2018 25 minutes ago, ml1dch said: While I obviously get that it's posted in a remember-the-bad-bits-as-well way, I think that given they're currently being directed by Gavin Williamson I'd sooner take my chances with the technocrats. it has its positives and its negatives and I'm not entirely convinced that it's a wholly bad thing. Would an EU Army have gone to war in Iraq? European Army keeps getting stated like its a given that its a bad thing, I'm not convinced either way (Cue jokes about the French surrendering and eating cheese while the Italian tanks have five reverse gears) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chindie Posted November 23, 2018 VT Supporter Share Posted November 23, 2018 There's no suggestion an EU army would ever happen. A small number of leaders suggesting it doesn't mean it'll happen. There are 27 nations in the EU, each with their own views,and each bringing a variety of those views. And the EU almost specialises in opt outs. It's very unlikely an EU army will happen, and even if it did it's unlikely it would be something unanimously participated in. Especially when you'd have members like Ireland, obviously staunchly neutral. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
villakram Posted November 23, 2018 Share Posted November 23, 2018 2 hours ago, Chindie said: There's no suggestion an EU army would ever happen. A small number of leaders suggesting it doesn't mean it'll happen. There are 27 nations in the EU, each with their own views,and each bringing a variety of those views. And the EU almost specialises in opt outs. It's very unlikely an EU army will happen, and even if it did it's unlikely it would be something unanimously participated in. Especially when you'd have members like Ireland, obviously staunchly neutral. The biggest obstacle is NATO. Unpopular domestic politicians finding a flair for foreign entanglements mon ami! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bickster Posted November 24, 2018 Moderator Share Posted November 24, 2018 Am I reading it right that she's that hell bent on her deal (that won't pass anyway) that she as good as given away Gibraltar? That's really not going to help her is it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brommy Posted November 24, 2018 Share Posted November 24, 2018 (edited) 51 minutes ago, bickster said: Am I reading it right that she's that hell bent on her deal (that won't pass anyway) that she as good as given away Gibraltar? That's really not going to help her is it I don’t think you are reading it right. Spain wanted to be able to discuss Gibraltar directly with the UK, post Brexit, instead of the current arrangement of discussion through a middleman (the EU). If Spain are now supporting the withdrawal deal, it’s possible they will get their annual rejection email direct from London, instead of via Brussels. I think Gibraltar will remain a UK territory for a long time. Edited November 24, 2018 by brommy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chindie Posted November 24, 2018 VT Supporter Share Posted November 24, 2018 She's thrown Gibraltar under the bus in favour of getting rid of freedom of movement. That's what drives her. They're also switching 'low skilled' visas to 11 month duration so they don't have to be counted in migration statistics, to meet her dumb target. Presumably will also help when the invisible Europeans are replaced by the much more visible immigration from India and it's neighbours to make up the slack, that'll have the little Englanders having kittens. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snowychap Posted November 24, 2018 Share Posted November 24, 2018 (edited) According to the Grauniad: Quote The 27 EU member states are set to publish a further statement in solidarity with Spain at the summit, according to a leaked document seen by the Guardian. “After the United Kingdom leaves the union, Gibraltar will not be included in the territorial scope of the agreements to be concluded between the union and the United Kingdom,” the EU will say. In the statement, the EU will go on to warn that any separate deal to protect Gibraltar’s economy will “require a prior agreement of the Kingdom of Spain”. How true, accurate, &c. that is one can only guess. Edited November 24, 2018 by snowychap Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snowychap Posted November 24, 2018 Share Posted November 24, 2018 On that, letter from Sir Tim Barrow: Quote I am writing to set out the view of Her Maj's Gov... Her Majesty's Government notes that the sole purpose of Articvle 184 of the Withdrawal Agreement is to create best endeavours obligations for the Union and the United Kingdom to negotiate agreements governing their future relationship; that it imposes no obligations regarding the territorial scope of such agremements; and that there is therefore no obligation or presumption, in the basis of this provision, for such agreements to have the same territorial scope as the one provided for in Article 3 of the Withdrawal Agreement. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brommy Posted November 24, 2018 Share Posted November 24, 2018 Not sure what all the fuss over Spain/Gibraltar is. Spain will have a say in any changes to Gibraltar’s sovereignty. So the UK can’t change Gibraltar’s sovereignty without Spain’s permission. If the UK can’t transfer Gibraltar to Morocco (as if!), it might as well stay as a UK territory then! Another storm in teacup. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snowychap Posted November 24, 2018 Share Posted November 24, 2018 2 minutes ago, brommy said: Not sure what all the fuss over Spain/Gibraltar is. Spain will have a say in any changes to Gibraltar’s sovereignty. It's not about sovereignty, is it? Quote After the United Kingdom leaves the Union, Gibraltar will not be included in the territorial scope of the agreements to be concluded between the Union and th United Kingdom. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts