Davkaus Posted January 29, 2019 Share Posted January 29, 2019 Well, MPs have narrowly voted for what appears to be the impossible. I don't see how a resolution is any closer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post chrisp65 Posted January 29, 2019 Popular Post Share Posted January 29, 2019 brexit space programme 1 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sharkyvilla Posted January 29, 2019 Share Posted January 29, 2019 22 minutes ago, StefanAVFC said: Don't get me started on Faisal **** Islam. The way he chaired the first Brexit debate/interview on Sky was outrageous, like him doing his Paxman impression was more important than giving the two sides the chance to make their case. I wondered at the time how many people got put off by that first debate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jackbauer24 Posted January 29, 2019 Share Posted January 29, 2019 Am I right in thinking today, by and large, MPs decided to do nothing with a promise of doing something without being specific? Voted against every tangible action. Agreed not to leave without a deal but without an alternative. Agreed to THE deal if it included an element that is not up for any debate and, even if it was, doesn't explain what would have to give in return and assumes everyone would be happy with it. In effect they voted for 'something else' if they're allowed to negotiate at all. Another successful night in British politics... 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chindie Posted January 29, 2019 VT Supporter Share Posted January 29, 2019 3 minutes ago, jackbauer24 said: Am I right in thinking today, by and large, MPs decided to do nothing with a promise of doing something without being specific? Voted against every tangible action. Agreed not to leave without a deal but without an alternative. Agreed to THE deal if it included an element that is not up for any debate and, even if it was, doesn't explain what would have to give in return and assumes everyone would be happy with it. In effect they voted for 'something else' if they're allowed to negotiate at all. Another successful night in British politics... Pretty much. The Spelman amendment just says we don't want No Deal, but makes no comment on how to avoid that. It's useful as an indication of political will in the Commons and that's about it. And it only just got through. The Brady nonsense just directs May to renegotiate something that isn't negotiable without changing the redlines of her deal. It's chasing fantasies still. Hence why Lady Hemon's interjection to get the current moron holding the title of Secretary of State for Leaving the EU got the worst kind of non-answer. There wasn't an answer. Funnily enough as has been said elsewhere, today's complete farce highlights the necessity of a backstop. Parliament can't be trusted. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NurembergVillan Posted January 29, 2019 Moderator Share Posted January 29, 2019 57 minutes ago, Stevo985 said: we should just throw every politician into the sea FTFY Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
a m ole Posted January 29, 2019 Share Posted January 29, 2019 this is verging on criminal negligence Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
villakram Posted January 29, 2019 Share Posted January 29, 2019 5 hours ago, bickster said: Reuters Right at least one of the two following statements must be true Corbyn is stupid Corbyn is a disingenuous dick Why is he still propagating this idea that A50 will be extended as if it's wholly within the UK's purview to extend it? It will only be extended for a GE or 2nd Ref, how many chuffing times (today even by more than one person) does this have to be said before it sinks in and why is this? Because the ruling government have said so. Coherence is not exactly their thing, and reality will soon start forcing itself upon them. Possibilities, possibilities... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ml1dch Posted January 29, 2019 Share Posted January 29, 2019 (edited) 8 minutes ago, villakram said: and why is this? Because the ruling government have said so. Coherence is not exactly their thing, and reality will soon start forcing itself upon them. Possibilities, possibilities... No, because that's what the European Commission and European Council have said. Edited January 29, 2019 by ml1dch Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
villakram Posted January 29, 2019 Share Posted January 29, 2019 11 minutes ago, ml1dch said: No, because that's what the European Commission and European Council have said. Errr, Tusk explicitly stated tonight that consideration of an extension of A50 is on the table. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post Chindie Posted January 29, 2019 VT Supporter Popular Post Share Posted January 29, 2019 Quote It was the only Brexit majority the Commons had to offer. MPs voted, firmly and confidently, against reality. And then, just as firmly and confidently, they voted for fairy stories. Sensible propositions had been put before them to give them power over the Brexit process. They rejected them one after another. Dominic Grieve wanted to give MPs six days to explore options and direct the government. They voted to deny themselves this power by 301 to 321. Yvette Cooper wanted to give them the power to extend Article 50 if it looked like Britain was about to crash out the EU without a deal. They voted to deny themselves this power by 298 to 321. The one and only glimmer of hope was an amendment from Caroline Spelman which said MPs rejected leaving the EU without a deal, but contained no actual mechanisms to enforce it. This MPs accepted by 318 to 310. So they were insisting that no-deal should be ruled out but refusing to take any role whatsoever in preventing it themselves. They were like babies in suits. It was as pitiful an exhibition as we've ever seen from them: a masterclass in cowardice. Even now, years after the result, they are petrified of being seen to somehow undermine Brexit. Their mania is so severe that they are prepared to sabotage the mechanisms which would achieve what they themselves say should take place. That was how they rejected reality. Then they threw their lot in with the fairy tales. The last vote was on Graham Brady's amendment to replace the backstop with "alternative arrangements". What were these alternative arrangements? No-one would say. Brady himself has no idea. The prime minister won't offer anything. Even the Brexit secretary dodged the question. The backstop is only supposed to kick in if alternative arrangements, like the hardline Brexiters' dreams about frictionless technology, do not come to fruition. So applying them now was like answering a question with the question. What's your alternative arrangement if the alternative arrangements don't work? Well, an alternative arrangement of course. The basic truth remained the same as it was before. The DUP and ERG will only be happy if the backstop is made time-limited or can be ended unilaterally by the UK. The EU will never accept it if those things hold. So no deal seems possible. But all of that is irrelevant anyway, because the EU refuses to reopen the withdrawal agreement. Within minutes of the vote, it fired back its return salvo, from European Council president Donald Tusk. "The withdrawal agreement is and remains the best and only way to ensure the orderly withdrawal of the UK from the European Union," it said. "The backstop is part of the withdrawal agreement, and the withdrawal agreement is not open for re-negotiation." May had promised something she could not specify and which had already been ruled out. And not only that: she had shot her own deal in the heart. It was No.10 which said the border in Ireland had to be kept open. It was No.10 which asked for it to cover the whole of the UK. Now, after all that negotiation, she is going to go back to the EU and demand that they destroy the accomplishments she herself secured. It is insane. It is a degree of contortion which would be remarkable if it weren't so ghastly. But in a way, it was typical May tactics. She prioritised vague promises over content. She sabotaged something - anything - in order to fight another day. She made promises she could not keep on issues she knew to be false. Once again, she said anything, anything at all, to survive just a little longer. But there are consequences to this lunacy. Britain is now, it is clear to the world, not a serious country. The way it is behaving is simply not rational. Any reputation it had for credibility or sound judgement is gone. It is a basketcase. That is humiliating enough. But it has significant medium-term implications too. Firstly, it shows why the backstop was needed in the first place. This country has become an unreliable negotiating partner. It will demand something one day then seek to detonate it the next. The events in the Commons today actually had the ironic effect of reaffirming to the EU the need for the backstop insurance policy. On a broader level, we are about to go around the world asking for trade deals. But we're seen, by everyone, on the largest stage imaginable, to be fundamentally politically insane. We've gone mad and everyone is looking. This is as bleak a day as we have had in the entire Brexit process. All roads now seem blocked. MPs won't back an extension to Article 50. They won't back May's deal. And they won't back no-deal. They've opted for fairy tales over action. Things are looking very bad indeed. Britain is a basket case 6 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ml1dch Posted January 29, 2019 Share Posted January 29, 2019 9 minutes ago, villakram said: Errr, Tusk explicitly stated tonight that consideration of an extension of A50 is on the table. Yes. It will be under consideration if a request from the UK arrives and will be for the next two months until we leave. The main consideration if / when it arrives will be why an extension request is being made and what it is intended to achieve. Just as bicks said. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peterms Posted January 29, 2019 Share Posted January 29, 2019 37 minutes ago, ml1dch said: Yes. It will be under consideration if a request from the UK arrives and will be for the next two months until we leave. The main consideration if / when it arrives will be why an extension request is being made and what it is intended to achieve. Just as bicks said. I think I said that, and bicks said (or implied) Corbyn thought he could require May to force the EU to agree an extension unilaterally. But, hey ho... 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chindie Posted January 29, 2019 VT Supporter Share Posted January 29, 2019 (edited) Said pitiful leadership is, of course, good enough for Soubry to have confidence in it. Twice. Edited January 29, 2019 by Chindie 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fightoffyour Posted January 29, 2019 VT Supporter Share Posted January 29, 2019 1 2 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HanoiVillan Posted January 30, 2019 Share Posted January 30, 2019 The Mail is even worse: 1 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LondonLax Posted January 30, 2019 Share Posted January 30, 2019 (edited) From my understanding there are still a lot of bills the UK government need to debate and pass regardless of whether the government agrees its dream unicorn Brexit or wants to fall back on a WTO ‘no deal’ arrangement but there will not be enough time left to do the work required to pass them. I’d say an A50 extension, for purely procedural reasons if nothing else, is fairly likely. Edited January 30, 2019 by LondonLax 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peterms Posted January 30, 2019 Share Posted January 30, 2019 One issue on which Mrs May must press hard is the distribution of warm summer days across Europe. For decades, our economy has been undermined by our citizens having to travel to EU countries simply to catch a bit of sun and top up their vitamin D levels. At the same time, incoming tourism is hit hard by our indifferent weather. We have lost £trillions down the years because of this. It would be hard to imagine anything more blatantly unfair. Whether we stay or leave, this historic unfairness must be addressed, and we must be given a minimum of an extra 30 days a year at a temperature averaged between Spain, Italy and Greece between June and September. She has the full weight of Parliament behind her. We will not take Non for an answer. Sort it out, Junckets. Get your act together, Barmier. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ml1dch Posted January 30, 2019 Share Posted January 30, 2019 Anyone who thinks that the current position is sensible (not that many people seem to) should ask themselves what the UK reaction would be if the request were coming from the other direction. If the Commission turned round with two months to go and said "sorry, but that deal we sorted out - we need to increase the outstanding liabilities bill by 15 billion and go back to the old, Northern Ireland-only backstop. We just can't get it through the European Parliament otherwise". If we wouldn't agree to that, why on earth does anyone think it will be different in the reverse? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sharkyvilla Posted January 30, 2019 Share Posted January 30, 2019 10 minutes ago, ml1dch said: Anyone who thinks that the current position is sensible (not that many people seem to) should ask themselves what the UK reaction would be if the request were coming from the other direction. If the Commission turned round with two months to go and said "sorry, but that deal we sorted out - we need to increase the outstanding liabilities bill by 15 billion and go back to the old, Northern Ireland-only backstop. We just can't get it through the European Parliament otherwise". If we wouldn't agree to that, why on earth does anyone think it will be different in the reverse? If the other option was no deal then we would have to consider it. Like I said the other day, this is the test of the Brexiteers mantra that they need a deal as much as we do, if this is literally the only deal May can get through parliament then they would have to consider it, even with this mythical 'alternative arrangement' thrown in. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts