We've got plenty of time!
Brexited | the worst threads live the longest
- Thread starter Silva
- Start date
I really think that if it ends up being No Deal then an extension is a must.
It'd at least allow the UK & the EU to get things in place so that it can sort of work. If it happens this month I can see a fairly chaotic transition and scenes similar to Fyre Festival taking place.
It'd need to be at least a 12 month extension imo but at least the UK can begin to arrange some trade deals and maybe even a trading arrangement with the EU.
It'd at least allow the UK & the EU to get things in place so that it can sort of work. If it happens this month I can see a fairly chaotic transition and scenes similar to Fyre Festival taking place.
It'd need to be at least a 12 month extension imo but at least the UK can begin to arrange some trade deals and maybe even a trading arrangement with the EU.
All going well then...
That would likely be impossible for her to deliver. The fixed term parliament act provides for only two ways in which an early general election can be called. Either the government has to lose a 'no confidence' vote and Corbyn has already tried that and lost or two thirds of the members have to agree to dissolving parliament and its unlikely that a couple of hundred conservative MPs are going to agree to that.
Given that the talk seems to be that if a deal such as May is trying to get through can be struck then our dear Mr Hammond could well have 30 billion plus to give away in the budget I cannot see the conservatives letting go of that juicy morsel without a fight.
That's what the transition is about which only happens if the UK sign the withdrawal agreement. The trading arrangement with the UK/EU will take many years.
2/3 of 650mp's would be 433
Except there are 7 sinn Fein and therefore 429 MP's required
Presuming all the opposition parties except the dup vote for the election that gives 322 votes so in reality they need just over 100 conservatives to vote for the election... And if may calls the election I think she would have over a third of her party at least back it.
If she and the party feel they can increase their majority they might decide it's a dice worth rolling... And if they do I think the 2/3 is pretty much a formality
I can't imagine any of them leading trade talks which will take years. But it's not only with EU they've got to negotiate. Where are they going to find all these hundreds of skilled negotiators?
Presumably they will be paying skilled negotiators signifigantly over 30k a year so we should bring some of the EU team over ... They seem to be doing a far better job than our lot
I certainly haven't seen any recently in the HoC.
The fixed term parliament act is a load of bollocks. No PM ever called an election without a reason, and all they need is a portion of their own party to agree with them, and if they didn't have support they wouldn't be party leader in the first place.
Oh dear do I really have to spell everything out in 'Jack and Jill' format. I suppose I must. To begin with I was only responding to Honest Johns idea that all May needs to do is to say to Corbyn that she will call a GE providing that Labour support her WA. Now that would be irrespective of standings in the polls etc. Under those circumstances I cannot see how the heck she would get in excess of 100 of her side to support her. Yes PMs call elections when they have a reason that goes without saying and the reason is always that they think they can win.
And just as an aside 434 members have to call for parliament to be dissolved for it to happen. All seats (650) are counted towards the 2/3rds majority irrespective of whether any of them are vacant or not taken up. 2/3rds is actually 433 and a bit but the bit is rounded up thus making 434.
Time for me to go back to sleep again until things calm down in another 2 or more years.
Looks like you slept through the last general election too then.
Do I really have to
https://yougov.co.uk/topics/politic...g-intention-conservatives-40-labour-31-3-4-ma
I mean show me a recent important whipped vote where a government hasn't managed to get at least a hundred votes... On second thought yawn off for a couple of years
Last edited:
One thing that the last few months has told us is that we are not ready to make an orderly exit from the EU.
On that basis and assuming the EU agree then delaying the leaving date is the only thing that makes sense at the moment.
I do believe that a couple of months delay may well not be long enough as I believe that the Tories will want to replace TM.
I have no idea who should be the next leader and to be honest I don't really care.
Leaving the EU was never going to be even remotely as easy as we were lead to believe which actually should not be a surprise.
No one has ever done this before. That coupled with the total lack of forethought or planning has resulted in the terribly chaotic shambles.
We don't need a 2nd referendum and we certainly don't need a GA.
What we need is a new leader who is able to organise proper cross party unity and established a common purpose built on a clearly defined and planned exit.
Instead of a big bang type exit, maybe a staged exit would be less problematic.
On that basis and assuming the EU agree then delaying the leaving date is the only thing that makes sense at the moment.
I do believe that a couple of months delay may well not be long enough as I believe that the Tories will want to replace TM.
I have no idea who should be the next leader and to be honest I don't really care.
Leaving the EU was never going to be even remotely as easy as we were lead to believe which actually should not be a surprise.
No one has ever done this before. That coupled with the total lack of forethought or planning has resulted in the terribly chaotic shambles.
We don't need a 2nd referendum and we certainly don't need a GA.
What we need is a new leader who is able to organise proper cross party unity and established a common purpose built on a clearly defined and planned exit.
Instead of a big bang type exit, maybe a staged exit would be less problematic.
A new leader like Boris eh?
Long extension, like 10 years, and just forget the whole thing!
The obvious way to solve this is to have a second referendum with the same choices: 1 Remain 2 Leave (out of everything).
It's the same choice we were given 2 1/2 years ago, but parliament doesn't want to exercise the will of the people.
Personally i think that this time around remain might win just, but parliament would be shitting themselves praying for a remain vote.
It's the same choice we were given 2 1/2 years ago, but parliament doesn't want to exercise the will of the people.
Personally i think that this time around remain might win just, but parliament would be shitting themselves praying for a remain vote.
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
Why can Mrs May and the government have 3 goes trying to win her deal and a 2nd referendum would be anti-democratic?
That's the question we're all asking. It's madness.
I'm pretty sure our pocket dictator doesn't care about the UK. He has zero reason to block an extension. With the EPP seriously considering kicking Fidesz out, they'll probably go along with whatever the Germans want in this particular matter.
Not really.
There is a complete difference between a vote in the HoC and the whole country voting in a referendum.
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
Shocking news
Bercow hasn't ruled yet. Another vote on exactly the same motion is clearly against the rules in house of commons, it's absolutely clear in erksine May. It's not a rule that has had to be used recently, last time was in the 40's I think. It's there for exactly this kind of circumstance though. To prevent the government endlessly bringing back the same votes, browbeating and bullying MPs in to submission.
The government will probably try and argue the motion is different someway, it will be up to Bercow though to rule and decide on that, and I believe there is a very good chance it will be ruled out of order, unless May can get further concessions to substantially change the substance of the vote.
There is also a very good chance a decent proportion of MPs will reconsider the arguments about the "deal" this weekend, but then in dig in even further against it. The desperate shenanigans the government is up to, and the ludicrous stage managed propaganda moves May pulled will ensure that.
How so, though? Isn’t voting in both situations supposed to represent “the will” of the voters? Why is a referendum vote more sacrosanct than a “meaningful vote” in parliament?
I get the whiff of expediency, even hypocrisy.
The man is a shyster, a charlatan of the highest order.
For those that voted for Brexit as a protest vote, did it possibly achieve their goal? Presumably it was never estimated how many of them there were, and not many people talked about that publicly for fear of backlash. Yet it was widely acknowledged that was one of the driving forces.
I would imagine even they would think that intention was not a particularly well thought through one at this stage. However if you put that aside, if the intention was to demonstrate that the people representing them are incompetent, self serving and pose real democratic issues, this is a particularly striking example with the eyes of the world looking on.
Many people will say that you didn't need Brexit feckups to prove that, but it's not just about what the UK public perceives - I think this is creating some alarm on an international level. A kind of cry for help when faith in your own govt. has been lost, in the way that Mexican folks were delighted with the international spotlight after the Ayotzinapa tragedy.
It's kind of amazing that some people need to be reminded that unleashing chaos actually isn't in their best interests, short-term or long-term. It's just an impulse that reasonable societies are forced to control to survive.
I would imagine even they would think that intention was not a particularly well thought through one at this stage. However if you put that aside, if the intention was to demonstrate that the people representing them are incompetent, self serving and pose real democratic issues, this is a particularly striking example with the eyes of the world looking on.
Many people will say that you didn't need Brexit feckups to prove that, but it's not just about what the UK public perceives - I think this is creating some alarm on an international level. A kind of cry for help when faith in your own govt. has been lost, in the way that Mexican folks were delighted with the international spotlight after the Ayotzinapa tragedy.
It's kind of amazing that some people need to be reminded that unleashing chaos actually isn't in their best interests, short-term or long-term. It's just an impulse that reasonable societies are forced to control to survive.
No.
Because Brexit is about taking control away from Europe and giving it to British politicians.
Perhaps he already has, he's still in his job isn't he, whereas a few months back he was likely to be turfed out for bullying one of his staff... but that all went strangely quiet??
You'll need to explain your understanding of what the intentions of the protest vote are before you can demonstrate why it didn't realise them. The few people I know who did put in a protest vote did not do it to take back control because they're acutely aware of the lack of control, influence or even worth that they have as citizens in this system. They just wanted other people to realise that too.
You just seem to be describing what you would've wanted the protest vote to represent, because at least it has a broader and more beneficial goal in mind. Lots of people don't think about the world that way.
I wonder how much these Brexit proceedings have cost the taxpayers in England and Europe, from the referendum itself to the time spent by politicians debating this nonsense rather than trying to make changes happen in parliament.
He's a politician, they're usually the epitome of "do as I say, not as I do".
Except my local MSP, he's pretty awesome.
In fairness to old Nige, none of them will. 50 old people walking 200 miles in 2 weeks based on self-certification of their ability to do it?
They'll have jacked it in by Northallerton.
Brexit in a nutshell.
Of courseBrexit in a nutshell.
Not a fundemntal difference. In that, people cacn change their mind!
Also, we hav a general election every 5 years. BREXIT is arguably more final than a change of gervernment so why not have another referendum on the options we have in front of us now 2 years on? It doesn't make sense.
What would be the reason for a second referendum. The situation is complicated enough already and extremely divisive.
Another leave vote wouldn't help and a remain vote would beg yet another vote.
Not necessary IMHO.
Yeah. A vote in the HoC can be legally binding but in the UK a referendum is never legally binding.