Indeed, and I'm not referring to the history of how we ended up here.
Not sure I follow the point you're making. Could you clarify?
Brexited | the worst threads live the longest
- Thread starter Silva
- Start date
The choices are all design by or as a result of the Tories. To blame labor for the resulting clusterfeck isn't fair even if a more charismatic leader might have been able to capture the imagination of the nation.
You can blame Labor and Cornyn for being a bit shit but Brexit isn't their clusterfeck. Their mission statement isn't to roll over and agree just because the Tories have made a complete and utter arse of everything.
So the greatest threat to the country in seventy years should be decided within a party? The Tories are an extreme right wing mob. Just look at their reaction to the PM talking to the elder of the opposition.
Even better analogy.
The current situation is just self inflicted suicide.
Don't really disagree with any of that, my post wasn't talking about that either. I'm just talking about the existing parliamentary deadlock, irrespective of how we got here. You pointed out that the Tories didnt vote for the options Labour backed & how that was pushing us to no deal, but its also true that Labour didnt vote for an option the Tories backed.
Bear in mind that its not in our hands to give ourselves endless extensions to A50. If we eventually fall out of the EU without a deal because Parliament couldnt find agreement about any route forward & ran out of time, then Parliament as a whole is to blame, or at least that's my opinion.
It is the government's responsibility to sort the mess out that they created. Not the opposition's.
And the Tories are voting against all possible soft Brexit options. Labor are backing many of them.
I think that shows where the focus has been in the discussions. Blame and party preservation.
I'm still not convinced the meeting and reaction isn't all an orchestrated ploy to prepare for a GE.
That is completely understandable. As a modern civilised country of course it should be perfectly possible for both the main parties to cooperate.
However, the recent events are bound to colour people's perceptions of our elected politicians.
They have all behaved in a totally unacceptable manner.
Now is definitely the time to stop and show proper leadership. God knows we need it.
So it has just descended into an argument about who is to blame the most.
No solutions, no agreements, no compromise. Pathetic.
No solutions, no agreements, no compromise. Pathetic.
I suppose that was inevitable after the indicative votes failed.
The next weeks/months will be about apportioning blame for the no deal chaos. Everyone now has one eye on a GE.
Agreed. Imagine wanting to be in charge of the country in such a crisis, not this one, the much worse one to come. I'd say any new government would last one year at the most.
Normally you'd be right. But it's Corbyn here, he's to blame for everything ever.
It was evident even in January.
As soon as No Deal or No Brexit came into view, it became about self-preservation.
Both parties know that they can't be the one left holding the bomb when it goes off.
Some people have continually moaned about Labour sitting on the fence.
But within their posturing they have maintained their requirement for a Customs Union with the EU and closer economic cooperation, something that is now gaining favour. A so called soft Brexit.
Whether that resolves the Irish border issue is another matter.
Compare that with the Conservatives totally muddled divisions and indecision.
It is perfectly obvious that blame rests with both sides but it is wholly incorrect to apportion the majority of the blame on the opposition party. It is very much a failure of the government and their leader for the situation this country is in.
Why. Because they called the referendum and ran a shambolic campaign.
They completely failed to plan for what leaving the EU meant.
They who have been abject at negotiating with the EU.
They who have the widest divisions.
And they for failing to communicate effectively with the country on what to expect during the A50 period.
It is all about cause and effect.
Unfortunately Jeremy Corbyn is an ideal stooge on who to shift the blame and that is the Tories tactic.
Some people have continually moaned about Labour sitting on the fence.
But within their posturing they have maintained their requirement for a Customs Union with the EU and closer economic cooperation, something that is now gaining favour. A so called soft Brexit.
Whether that resolves the Irish border issue is another matter.
Compare that with the Conservatives totally muddled divisions and indecision.
It is perfectly obvious that blame rests with both sides but it is wholly incorrect to apportion the majority of the blame on the opposition party. It is very much a failure of the government and their leader for the situation this country is in.
Why. Because they called the referendum and ran a shambolic campaign.
They completely failed to plan for what leaving the EU meant.
They who have been abject at negotiating with the EU.
They who have the widest divisions.
And they for failing to communicate effectively with the country on what to expect during the A50 period.
It is all about cause and effect.
Unfortunately Jeremy Corbyn is an ideal stooge on who to shift the blame and that is the Tories tactic.
That's not a soft brexit, it's a slightly less hard one and doesn't solve the Irish border.
No, you don't seem to acknowledge what these leave voters are unhappy with. Little clue is probably the amount of countries involved now, the EU has changed. I said you're stuck in the 70s because of your previous one note replies. I have no care or ever eluded to your feelings on the amount of countries and I myself never expressed any thought that I'd expect the EU to remain a handful of countries. You've really got the wrong idea here.
Regarding the talks of the EU army. All I said there was renewed talks. Your reply was there is no EU army. A pointless reply.
You may not be aware how other European politicians and citizens feel about the UK, that we hold it back.
Last edited:
I'm a little confused why the Tories who were angry at Corbyn for not meeting May are now angry at May for meeting Corbyn.
Confusing bunch
Confusing bunch
Corbyn wants the softest of soft brexit’s
I don't think he's in favour of single market membership (because he doesn't want freedom of movement).
This makes no sense whatsoever.
You said the EU has changed and then mentioned FoM. FoM was there in 1973. So that hasn't changed. Who's talking about an EU army? Closer collaboration yes.
So leave voters are now worried about FoM which has always been there and an army which is not on the horizon, I suppose like the Turks who are going to invade britain or what other nonsense can be invented.
A soft Brexit is Single Market with the 4 freedoms and Customs Union with no get out clauses. I don't remember anything like that.
What's the shortest extension the EU can give which makes it worthwhile for the UK to compete in European elections. 9 months? or more?
Understand that. I was trying to point out that they had a more consistent policy than some people say.
If they are going to make a success of the latest position they are going to have to accept the WA and move forward on identifying their requirements for the FA.
Let's see how things pan out.
I was going to say that it is almost comical but it is actually beyond comical.
I have a consistent policy that I want to win the lottery, the fact that I can't because I don't play is neither here nor there.
Having a consistent policy for nonsense is not an answer.
Yes they have to accept the WA, the problem is this political declaration which is only a guide really. A new trade agreement will take 4 or 5 years minimum, probably have three governments in that time with different politicians wanting different things.
The problem is that parliament seem to expect to have a final agreement in place when the UK leaves and can't get to grips with the WA is just about leaving with an idea of what might happen in the future.
Never said leave voters are worried about an EU army. You seem to be trying to react to this the whole time like some ardent EU supporter attacking some brexiteer and it's clouding your judgment, perhaps you do this a lot elsewhere. Just for the record I vote remain and we should revoke A50 and merely posed a speculative question UK/EU in 10 years time.
The EU army I pointed out was in relation to the UK leaving. There has been upbeat talks of an EU army in mainland Europe once the UK was thought to be leaving. You may not be aware but within Europe, some of its citizens and politicians feel the UK holds the EU back which is what I was speculating about.
Last edited:
Didn’t realise that.
I read the other day that he wanted Labour MP’s to vote for the Common market 2.0 plan which would mean staying in the single market and customs union therefore allowing freedom of movement.
I never thought for one moment that you didn't vote for remain.
Some may be talking about it. Some people talk of lots of things . We have all different kinds of nonsense from Mélenchon & Le Pen here in France.
Certainly.
We desperately need true leadership don't we. True leadership is about having the vision to look beyond the obvious to the possible.
It is then about putting in place the mechanism to get to that position and managing the transition.
Unfortunately we are being lead by people without that vision. Instead by people who cannot even see the obvious. Small minded amateurish people who completely fail to grasp the current problems and instead of resolving those problems, they are creating more by their stupid muddled thinking.
Believe me. I have worked with both types.
There were loads who could give you a thousand reasons why we couldn't do something. I had no respect for them; only for the positive thinkers who did not listen to that rubbish.
There are very few true leaders and maybe none amongst the 650 MPS and that is a real problem.
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
I'd be banned if I say how I really feel.
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
So apt.Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
"we're Voldemort"
http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_SPEECH-19-1970_en.htm
Extract: In light of Prime Minister May's statement last night, I believe we now have a few more days. If the United Kingdom is in a position to approve the Withdrawal Agreement with a sustainable majority by 12 April, the European Union should be prepared to accept a delay until 22 May.
But 12 April is the ultimate deadline for the approval of the Withdrawal Agreement by the House of Commons. If it has not done so by then, no further short extension will be possible. After 12 April, we risk jeopardising the European Parliament elections, and so threaten the functioning of the European Union.
Time is almost up.
Statement by President Juncker on the United Kingdom's withdrawal from the European Union at the European Parliament's plenary session
Brussels, 3 April 2019
President Tajani,
Honourable Members of this House,
The developments in Westminster over the past days have convinced me of what I already knew. The best way forward is the ratification of the Withdrawal Agreement. It has already been agreed by the Government of the United Kingdom, endorsed by this House as well as by the European Council.
In its decision 10 days ago, the European Council paved the way for an extension of the Article 50 negotiation period until the 22 May – on the condition the Withdrawal Agreement was approved by the House of Commons by 29 March. This was not the case.
In light of Prime Minister May's statement last night, I believe we now have a few more days. If the United Kingdom is in a position to approve the Withdrawal Agreement with a sustainable majority by 12 April, the European Union should be prepared to accept a delay until 22 May.
But 12 April is the ultimate deadline for the approval of the Withdrawal Agreement by the House of Commons. If it has not done so by then, no further short extension will be possible. After 12 April, we risk jeopardising the European Parliament elections, and so threaten the functioning of the European Union.
The Withdrawal Agreement is and has always been a compromise. A fair compromise in which both sides obtained some but not all of what they sought. It is the kind of compromise through which the European Union was built. The kind of compromise that enables the European project to advance. The kind of compromise we need at the moment.
Much of the debate in the House of Commons has related to the future relationship between the European Union and the United Kingdom. The European Union stands ready to add flexibility to the Political Declaration, to pave the way for a close economic partnership between the European Union and the United Kingdom in the future.
We stand ready to refer to a range of options, from a free trade agreement, to customs arrangements, to a Customs Union all the way to the European Economic Area. The openness we have shown from the start could be laid out, in purest clarity.
On the EU side, we stand ready to launch the talks and negotiations on the future partnership as soon as the Withdrawal Agreement is signed. Before the ink is dry. The Commission's negotiating team is in place. Michel Barnier, our Chief Negotiator, is ready. I would expect the same level of readiness on the United Kingdom side.
Whether this happens or not depends on the United Kingdom. The European Council gave the United Kingdom the time and the space to decide.
Yet I believe that a “no deal” at midnight on the 12 April is now a very likely scenario. It is not the outcome I want. But it is an outcome for which I have made sure the European Union is ready.
We have been preparing since December 2017. We have always known that the logic of Article 50 makes a “no-deal” the default outcome. We have long been aware of the balance of power in the House of Commons.
In that time, the Commission has published 91 preparedness notices, 32 non-legislative acts, 19 legislative proposals and 3 Communications. We have visited all 27 Member States to support their preparations. We have held 72 seminars with the Member States.
The measures we and the Member States have taken will mitigate the worst impact of a “no-deal” scenario. The protection offered is real. The measures will make sure that EU and UK citizens can continue to live and work where they are at the moment. They make sure that planes can take off and land. We have adapted our financial instrument to make it possible to help fishing communities. We have identified the ways in which law enforcement cooperation can continue. We have taken steps to mitigate disruption on our financial markets.
The measures we have taken are time-limited and unilateral. They provide a cushion for key EU interests at least until the end of the year. But disruption will be inevitable for citizens, for businesses and for almost every sector.
The United Kingdom will be affected more than the European Union because there is no such thing as a “managed or negotiated no-deal” and there is no such thing as a “no-deal transition”.
And whatever happens, the United Kingdom will still be expected to address the three main separation issues.
At the European Council next week, we will listen to Prime Minister May's intentions and decide how to proceed. The principles that will guide my actions are clear. I will work until the last moment to avoid a “no-deal” outcome.
The only ones who would benefit from such disruption are the opponents of the global rules-based order. The only ones who would cheer are the populists and the nationalists. The only ones who would celebrate are those who want both the European Union and the United Kingdom to be weak.
The European Union will not kick any Member State out. I will personally do everything I can to prevent a disorderly Brexit and I expect political leaders across the EU27 and in the United Kingdom to do the same.
Thank you.
Brussels, 3 April 2019
President Tajani,
Honourable Members of this House,
The developments in Westminster over the past days have convinced me of what I already knew. The best way forward is the ratification of the Withdrawal Agreement. It has already been agreed by the Government of the United Kingdom, endorsed by this House as well as by the European Council.
In its decision 10 days ago, the European Council paved the way for an extension of the Article 50 negotiation period until the 22 May – on the condition the Withdrawal Agreement was approved by the House of Commons by 29 March. This was not the case.
In light of Prime Minister May's statement last night, I believe we now have a few more days. If the United Kingdom is in a position to approve the Withdrawal Agreement with a sustainable majority by 12 April, the European Union should be prepared to accept a delay until 22 May.
But 12 April is the ultimate deadline for the approval of the Withdrawal Agreement by the House of Commons. If it has not done so by then, no further short extension will be possible. After 12 April, we risk jeopardising the European Parliament elections, and so threaten the functioning of the European Union.
The Withdrawal Agreement is and has always been a compromise. A fair compromise in which both sides obtained some but not all of what they sought. It is the kind of compromise through which the European Union was built. The kind of compromise that enables the European project to advance. The kind of compromise we need at the moment.
Much of the debate in the House of Commons has related to the future relationship between the European Union and the United Kingdom. The European Union stands ready to add flexibility to the Political Declaration, to pave the way for a close economic partnership between the European Union and the United Kingdom in the future.
We stand ready to refer to a range of options, from a free trade agreement, to customs arrangements, to a Customs Union all the way to the European Economic Area. The openness we have shown from the start could be laid out, in purest clarity.
On the EU side, we stand ready to launch the talks and negotiations on the future partnership as soon as the Withdrawal Agreement is signed. Before the ink is dry. The Commission's negotiating team is in place. Michel Barnier, our Chief Negotiator, is ready. I would expect the same level of readiness on the United Kingdom side.
Whether this happens or not depends on the United Kingdom. The European Council gave the United Kingdom the time and the space to decide.
Yet I believe that a “no deal” at midnight on the 12 April is now a very likely scenario. It is not the outcome I want. But it is an outcome for which I have made sure the European Union is ready.
We have been preparing since December 2017. We have always known that the logic of Article 50 makes a “no-deal” the default outcome. We have long been aware of the balance of power in the House of Commons.
In that time, the Commission has published 91 preparedness notices, 32 non-legislative acts, 19 legislative proposals and 3 Communications. We have visited all 27 Member States to support their preparations. We have held 72 seminars with the Member States.
The measures we and the Member States have taken will mitigate the worst impact of a “no-deal” scenario. The protection offered is real. The measures will make sure that EU and UK citizens can continue to live and work where they are at the moment. They make sure that planes can take off and land. We have adapted our financial instrument to make it possible to help fishing communities. We have identified the ways in which law enforcement cooperation can continue. We have taken steps to mitigate disruption on our financial markets.
The measures we have taken are time-limited and unilateral. They provide a cushion for key EU interests at least until the end of the year. But disruption will be inevitable for citizens, for businesses and for almost every sector.
The United Kingdom will be affected more than the European Union because there is no such thing as a “managed or negotiated no-deal” and there is no such thing as a “no-deal transition”.
And whatever happens, the United Kingdom will still be expected to address the three main separation issues.
- Citizens' rights would still need to be upheld and protected.
- The United Kingdom would still have to honour its financial commitments made as a Member State.
- And thirdly, a solution would still need to be found on the island of Ireland that preserves peace and the internal market. The United Kingdom must fully respect the letter and spirit of the Good Friday Agreement.
At the European Council next week, we will listen to Prime Minister May's intentions and decide how to proceed. The principles that will guide my actions are clear. I will work until the last moment to avoid a “no-deal” outcome.
The only ones who would benefit from such disruption are the opponents of the global rules-based order. The only ones who would cheer are the populists and the nationalists. The only ones who would celebrate are those who want both the European Union and the United Kingdom to be weak.
The European Union will not kick any Member State out. I will personally do everything I can to prevent a disorderly Brexit and I expect political leaders across the EU27 and in the United Kingdom to do the same.
Thank you.
Extract: In light of Prime Minister May's statement last night, I believe we now have a few more days. If the United Kingdom is in a position to approve the Withdrawal Agreement with a sustainable majority by 12 April, the European Union should be prepared to accept a delay until 22 May.
But 12 April is the ultimate deadline for the approval of the Withdrawal Agreement by the House of Commons. If it has not done so by then, no further short extension will be possible. After 12 April, we risk jeopardising the European Parliament elections, and so threaten the functioning of the European Union.
Time is almost up.
What a terrible analogy to use for your own party
Setting himself up nicely for a Boris vs Corbyn campaign, almost like he planned eh
They’re all messaging very nicely that any Brexit consequences are now Labour’s fault. Corbyn really needs to play this smart now.
Precisely this.
I'd say it's perfect.What a terrible analogy to use for your own party