Cont: Brexit: Now What? 7th heaven...

[McHrozni]

Now if Parliament gets its act together and manages to pass legislation that in the event of no deal, Article 50 is revoked then that'd be a different matter. Then again IMO there's very little chance of that happening because the majority of MPs (all DUP, nearly all Conservative, many Labour) apparently want Brexit.

That's how it should be done. But if that isn't done, Parliament passes a dozen resolutions saying it doesn't want a no deal and nothing else and no deal is inevitable ... PM could argue s/he was within his rights - indeed duties - to revoke article 50.

The point is probably moot if we're talking about BJ. It would be fascinating to watch Corbyn agonize over such a descision though. Morbid, but fascinating.

McHrozni

 

[The Don]

That's how it should be done. But if that isn't done, Parliament passes a dozen resolutions saying it doesn't want a no deal and nothing else and no deal is inevitable ... PM could argue s/he was within his rights - indeed duties - to revoke article 50.
The point is probably moot if we're talking about BJ. It would be fascinating to watch Corbyn agonize over such a descision though. Morbid, but fascinating.

McHrozni

Oh, for sure they could argue that, but that would require the kind of leadership and honesty that has been absolutely lacking through the whole process.

It's true that the UK voted for Brexit (by a clear but narrow margin) but they voted for a "unicorns and rainbows" Brexit in which the UK would remain part of the EEA (or at least the Customs Union) while not having to abide by the rules of same. When it became clear that kind of Brexit was simply unachievable then either the PM should have called off Brexit on the grounds that the advertised version was unavailable or, more democratically, put it to the public again.

Both Conservative candidates have committed to delivering Brexit with a no deal being preferred to no Brexit so any talk of a Conservative PM revoking Article 50 is moot.

You're right that Corbyn would be vacillating but IMO he'd be happy to leave with no deal because he's deluded enough to believe that he'd quickly be able to negotiate a fantastic post-Brexit relationship with the EU that would deliver the workers' utopia he has been promising

 

[Nessie]

How would Scotland manage that when the bulk of the Royal Navy is not in Scotland, and that which is in Scotland is - obviously - armed?

An Irn Bur powered pedalo skippered by a drunk Glaswegian.

 

[Nessie]

The Brexit Party takes their seats in the EU Parliament in Brussels, whilst at the same time declaring the EU undemocratic and we should just go with the WTO. I wonder when Farage will realise he cannot be a highly paid MP at the WTO in Geneva?

 

[The Don]

The Brexit Party takes their seats in the EU Parliament in Brussels, whilst at the same time declaring the EU undemocratic and we should just go with the WTO. I wonder when Farage will realise he cannot be a highly paid MP at the WTO in Geneva?

Doesn't matter. He will still have a generous pension thanks to his years of service in the EU parliament and his backers like Aaron Banks are bound to reward him generously in the event of no-deal. He'll not go short

 

[Guybrush Threepwood]

Doesn't matter. He will still have a generous pension thanks to his years of service in the EU parliament and his backers like Aaron Banks are bound to reward him generously in the event of no-deal. He'll not go short

Indeed, I don't think we need to start a Go Fund Me for Nigel

 

[Greebo]

Indeed, I don't think we need to start a Go Fund Me for Nigel

Some of the people he's representing would like to see that as a wage per YEAR

 

[IanS]

That's only true if Parliament can agree on an alternative course of action.

If at some point in time the EU refuses to extend the Brexit deadline, Parliament can pass as many "The UK cannot leave with no-deal" resolutions it likes, but if it cannot agree on an alternative course of action, we will end up with a no deal.

So far, every alternative to a no deal has been rejected. Perhaps with the added pressure of an impending no deal, Parliament may find an appetite for Theresa May's deal (perhaps with some different wording to disguise the backstop ), a second referendum or even revoking article 50 but so far it seems that whilst a no deal is unacceptable, so is everything else.

Well one alternative course of action which would be inevitable in that case (as just explained at least 3 times now), is that the PM would be forced to return to the EU asking for an extension of A50.

What happens if the EU refuse to extend for more time, I don't know. And I don't expect anyone else here knows what the legal position is in that case. But the point is that the PM cannot exit the EU by doing nothing as was repeatedly claimed above.

 

[IanS]

Voting against a No Deal Brexit doesn't give you anything. You have to vote for an ammendment that does something else.



It increases the likelyhood, that much is true. I also think when push comes to shove, HoC will pass something, anything, that will prevent a no deal Brexit.
McHrozni

OK, well first, just on the highlight (last sentence) ... YES! ... of course ... there are all sorts of agreements that the MPs can pass in a vote. And we are in a different situation now ... Mrs May has gone, a more pro-Brexit PM is certain to become Prime Minster, all MPs have now seen the threat from Farage in the EU election results, the Conservatives in particular were badly beaten in that EU election ... those are all factors that serve to concentrate the minds of MPs on what they will or will not vote to accept.

Re. the first sentence (un-highlighted) - There are plenty of options that MPs could agree too (I spelled out many of them several times in the above posts … and there may be all sorts of other/new votes/options proposed now in the HoC). But so far the reason for not agreeing Mrs May's deal, is that (a) many MPs thought the “Irish Backstop” arrangements were unacceptable (and that might change a bit under a new PM with new meetings with the EU), but more importantly imho the majority of MPs simply do not want the UK to leave the EU … so really that majority wants either to revoke A50, or else hold a new referendum (which they hope will vote against any Brexit), or else to have a General Election (which Labour either hopes to win, or hopes at least to form an emergency coalition with the Lib Dems, and then to propose merely some new arrangements and changes within the EU, ie not really a Brexit, but just some of the changes that many anti-EU voters in the UK, and in France and elsewhere would like to see within the EU … particularly (apparently) on immigration rules ... where immigration was clearly the main issue for many if not most of the people who voted for Brexit in the referendum).

 

[The Don]

Well one alternative course of action which would be inevitable in that case (as just explained at least 3 times now), is that the PM would be forced to return to the EU asking for an extension of A50.

Only if parliament votes to do that.

Looking at past history Parliament would happily vote to say that a no deal is unacceptable but they may not be prepared to force the PM to ask for an extension. The motion would be introduced by one of the opposition parties and so the Conservatives and DUP would be obliged to oppose it (under a three line whip so the number of "rebels" would be small) and a smattering of Labour Party MPs would also oppose it.

If the motion was "Prevent a no deal and go back to the EU for an extension" then I can honestly see that failing.

What happens if the EU refuse to extend for more time, I don't know. And I don't expect anyone else here knows what the legal position is in that case. But the point is that the PM cannot exit the EU by doing nothing as was repeatedly claimed above.

You're right, the PM cannot force nothing to happen (by preventing votes and/or proroguing Parliament) but if Parliament fails to agree an alternative course of action (and so far there's no indication that they will be able to do so) the default is to leave with no deal.

 

[IanS]

You're right that Corbyn would be vacillating but IMO he'd be happy to leave with no deal because he's deluded enough to believe that he'd quickly be able to negotiate a fantastic post-Brexit relationship with the EU that would deliver the workers' utopia he has been promising

Why do you say that Corbyn wants to leave the EU at all, let alone saying he actually wants to leave with "No Deal"?

That's the exact opposite of what he has ever said, if iirc.

He has said many times that in the referendum he voted against Brexit. And although the Labour party took various tactical positions in some of the recent Brexit voting that we saw in the HoC, Labour's overall position on all those votes was to refuse a No Deal exit, and also to vote against any of Mrs May's proposed exit deals.

Iirc, all through the previous voting, Labour had been calling for a new referendum or "Peoples Vote" ... that's the complete opposite of wanting a No Deal exit (or even any exit at all).

 

[The Don]

Why do you say that Corbyn wants to leave the EU at all, let alone saying he actually wants to leave with "No Deal"?

That's the exact opposite of what he has ever said, if iirc.

Because he has been anti-EU for decades and was a key influencer in the Labour Party changing its Brexit policy from Remain to Leave.

When I joined the party in the early 80's he was staunchly anti-EU and when I left the party in the 2000's he was still anti-EU.

The only time he expressed Remain sentiments was when, as Labour leader he was obliged to during the referendum campaign because it was party policy. He did so reluctantly and unconvincingly and the first chance he got, he changed Labour Party policy.

Here's a summary that someone has prepared.

https://www.markpack.org.uk/153744/jeremy-corbyn-brexit/

He has said many times that in the referendum he voted against Brexit. And although the Labour party took various tactical positions in some of the recent Brexit voting that we saw in the HoC, Labour's overall position on all those votes was to refuse a No Deal exit, and also to vote against any of Mrs May's proposed exit deals.

Iirc, all through the previous voting, Labour had been calling for a new referendum or "Peoples Vote" ... that's the complete opposite of wanting a No Deal exit (or even any exit at all).

If Jeremy Corbyn voted Remain it would be contrary to the views he expressed for decades prior to the referendum and those he expressed after the referendum. Perhaps he did vote Remain to toe the party line (but then again that's not bothered him in the past), or maybe he's telling porkies when he said he voted Remain

Yes, Jeremy Corbyn does not want a no-deal Brexit but he has also been resolutely against a second referendum (much to the despair of most of the parliamentary Labour Party and Labour Party membership) much less revocation of Article 50.

Given a straight choice between no-deal or revoking article 50, I think he would choose no-deal on the grounds that he believes he could quickly negotiate a great deal for the UK in the aftermath of no-deal.

 

[IanS]

You're right, the PM cannot force nothing to happen (by preventing votes and/or proroguing Parliament) but if Parliament fails to agree an alternative course of action (and so far there's no indication that they will be able to do so) the default is to leave with no deal.

At last, Thank You!

I think they can vote to agree on other options (ie other than a deal such as Mrs May's or a No Deal exit). I think that would almost certainly have happened already if they had continued the Indicative Voting down to the last two (or 3) options.

But I think the main problem is that the majority of MPs do not actually want us to leave the EU. So (thus far) they have been unwilling to vote for any of the previous options that were offering various terms/ways for exiting the EU.

I expect a majority of MPs would rather see a new referendum, or else a new General Election. But they are all a bit worried about those options too. Because a new referendum may not change the public mood at all, no matter what the result (unless it was landslide for Remain). And both Conservative and Labour now have serious doubts about winning any new General Election, ie due to Farage's Brexit party showing that it will probably take a huge amount of votes from both of them.

Unfortunately one of the other options that could still succeed is a vote defeating any proposal to rule out a No Deal exit. And that could be seen in legal terms (and by the Speaker) as support for a No Deal exit. So that's one way that a No Deal exit might happen almost by default.

 

[The Don]

At last, Thank You!

I'm not sure that I ever claimed otherwise, just that a pro no-deal Brexit PM could just allow all other options to expire (due to there being no agreement).

The conservatives would never bring legislation to allow a second referendum or article 50 revocation and as a result would vote against it on a three line whip. The DUP would follow suit and any Conservative "rebels" would be offset by pro-Brexit Labour MPs.

IMO the same goes for anything other than May's deal in a floppy hat and glasses

 

[Klimax]

Well one alternative course of action which would be inevitable in that case (as just explained at least 3 times now), is that the PM would be forced to return to the EU asking for an extension of A50.

What happens if the EU refuse to extend for more time, I don't know. And I don't expect anyone else here knows what the legal position is in that case. But the point is that the PM cannot exit the EU by doing nothing as was repeatedly claimed above.

We know what happens: Great Britain is out of EU without a deal and there is literally NOTHING ANYBODY can do about that. (irrelevant exceptions: ratification of WA or enforcing revocation of A50)

 

[ponderingturtle]

We know what happens: Great Britain is out of EU without a deal and there is literally NOTHING ANYBODY can do about that.

No people are saying there is nothing anyone will do about it, not that they couldn't do things, but revoking article 50 has no serious traction and unless they are looking for more record setting votes against it what is the point of putting the agreement to another vote?

The course is clear and Boris will proudly lead this country into a crash out. That is what the people voted for and that is what he will deliver.

 

[Ian Osborne]

The course is clear and Boris will proudly lead this country into a crash out. That is what the people voted for and that is what he will deliver.

Nobody voted for a crash-out for the simple reason nobody offered one. All Leave literature and campaigning centred on getting a very favourable trade deal which was easy to negotiate because the EU needs us more than we need them.

 

[Jack by the hedge]

Nobody voted for a crash-out for the simple reason nobody offered one. All Leave literature and campaigning centred on getting a very favourable trade deal which was easy to negotiate because the EU needs us more than we need them.

We still need a convention for how to indicate sarcasm, like a text colour or something.

Anyway, you're right, nobody voted for No Deal, except for all the loudest-braying voices on the Leave side, who are convinced that's exactly what they voted for. And the one thing they've been utterly consistent about is that they definitely knew what they were voting for (even if No Deal isn't what they said they were voting for at the time).

 

[Vixen]

True. I mean I can get by in French and actually do reasonably well in German and have a smattering of Spanish and Italian but that wouldn't do me a great deal of good if I was trying to get a job in The Netherlands, Finland or Slovenia.

You could try Swedish in Finland as that is an officially recognised language and not dissimilar to German or English in vocabulary and structure.

Dutch shouldn't be too difficult for the same reason. Old English came from Fresia after all.

Slavic languages might be harder.

Also in Finland, as well as a choice between Swedish and Finnish, students can choose to write their masters/PhD dissertation in German (as my cousin did) so quite a few people can speak German, too.

 

[Vixen]

......and for those who were leading the charge for Brexit, that still may be true.

• Boris likely gets to be Prime Minister
• The likes of Bamford and Dyson will likely end up with lower costs
• Rees Mogg and other ERG members stand to gain from whatever financial instruments they have in place
• Farage will be generously rewarded financially by his backers like Aaron Banks.....
• .....who will in turn be generously rewarded by his own backers

Steve Bannon.

Or is it Vladimir..?