Brexit Thread 2
-
Moggy
- "Special"
- Joined in 2008
- AKA: Moggy
pixelwinx wrote:Moggy wrote:pixelwinx wrote:Moggy wrote:pixelwinx wrote:Moggy wrote:pixelwinx wrote:Blue Eyes wrote:captain red dog wrote:I think Corbyn is bang on to put down a red line of May having to rule out "no deal" before talks. May has shown absolutely no sign of compromising on anything and ruling out a no deal should be the baseline for talks.
If she refuses, I don't see any other choice for Corbyn but to push for a second referendum.
I'm sort of in two minds about this. At first I thought it was good from Corbyn but as they're both stubborn strawberry floaters it was never going to fly and that the best way to avoid no-deal would be to work on an alternative. Or, May could agree that if no agreement has been reached by say March 15 they would have to revoke Article 50.
I don’t think there is any chance of Article 50 being revoked as that privilege is granted with the understanding that it is done in good faith of the UK changing their mind about leaving the EU. I think it’s much more likely that an extension of up to a year will be offered by the EU...there is some confusion though if this would be granted for renegotiation or purely for another referendum etc. With both a no deal and second referendum option being so problematic I think this is the likely outcome.
It’s not true that it has to be in good faith. All the court said was it has to follow a democratic process.
Good faith probably wrong phrase. By all accounts there is a clause which states is needs to be “unequivocal and unconditional"...funnily enough different people have different options on what that actually means.
It does say that but there is nothing to stop the UK triggering Article 50 again soon after revoking it. The ruling was clear that a member state has the right to revoke it unilaterally and Article 50 has no rules on when a member state can trigger it.
Time will out I suppose. I don’t think the government would entertain the idea of revoking it over seeking an extension as the message it would send out would be inflammatory to the Brexiteers.
I don’t think they will either. I think May will cling onto her deal for as long as possible and then we’ll crash out with no deal. An extension is possible but I think it’ll end up in the same place.
Think there could still be a plot twist that could see May misjudging something and losing the DUP or backing of her own colleagues which could lead to her downfall. For me the best option would be to get a year extension and enter renegotiations with a cross party team of Brexiteers who holding no fear of no deal could hold far more aces with the EU. This period could also be used to prepare for a no deal outcome as well. The problem from day one has been having a remainer in charge who has been constantly on the back foot.
Yeah because David Davis and Dominic Raab did so well, it was just the pesky Remainer that stopped them! That damn Remainer who triggered Article 50, refuses to allow future freedom of movement and who has threatened no deal for 2 years now. Damn her Remain tendencies.
The EU have been serious about no deal for well over a year now. They don’t want it but they don’t fear it. Sending a team of Leavers is pointless, they will not get anymore than May has and will just go for the no deal.
-
Lagamorph
- Member ♥
- Joined in 2010
Lagamorph's Underwater Photography Thread
Zellery wrote:Good post Lagamorph.
Turboman wrote:Lagomorph..... Is ..... Right
-
Garth
- Emeritus
- Joined in 2008
- Location: Norn Iron
twitter.com/PickardJE/status/1085863854654046208
Where is the compromise?
