Cont: Brexit: Now What? Magic 8 Ball's up

Status
Not open for further replies.
She never should have been in Boris's cabinet. She must have lied when she signed up to his "leave on Halloween, no ifs no buts" requirement. Good riddance.
 
p0lka said:
This sort of stuff makes me weep, the telegraph editor/people in charge know why labour is doing what it is doing, but their agenda is to misinform their readers.
It had a massive impact on the referendum itself, as EU bashing was something certain papers and the governments had been doing for years.

I think people should use 2 different sources for their news, never 1. Echo chambers are bad.
Click to expand...

It essentially seems to be the Telegraph asserting the turkeys should have voted for Xmas and telling their readers that's why they won't get any presents this year.
 
p0lka said:
This sort of stuff makes me weep, the telegraph editor/people in charge know why labour is doing what it is doing, but their agenda is to misinform their readers.
It had a massive impact on the referendum itself, as EU bashing was something certain papers and the governments had been doing for years.

I think people should use 2 different sources for their news, never 1. Echo chambers are bad.
Click to expand...


They had a correspondent in Brussels specifically to lie or strongly misrepresent the EU long before doing so was the norm. The correspondent wrote stories about British sausages being banned, bend bananas being banned,prawn cocktail crisps being banned, and couldn't believe the effect it had back home. He described it as a jape, like throwing rocks over a garden wall and listening to the crash as it hit the neighbour's greenhouse (which should tell you something about the man).

The Telegraph picked this reporter up because the Times fired him for lying, so he was ideally qualified, and kept him on as a columnist until very recently. What was the guy's name again? Oh yes, Boris Johnson.....
 
Strawberry said:
It would give time for a general election with the possibility of a different government that would negotiate a different deal with the EU.
Click to expand...


And that is fair enough as far as it goes. But an election in say, early November has a new Government which genuinely wants a deal, never mind what sort for the time being.



New Government elected early November. New Ministers briefed and completely brought up to date with the current state of play (the real one, not the one that is being fed to the public) and decides on new strategy.



This could take until the end of November just to put something together worth taking to the EU. With January 31 as the new deadline, that would leave 60 days to get a signed agreement, or an agreement to have a new referendum, with say a week or so set aside for the Xmas break, then hold the referendum etc...


For something which has not been agreed to in nearly three years? I really can't accept that the January 31 timeline would do anything more require yet a further extension. Sort of let's get an extension until we can work out how much more of an extension we really need. Which is partly what required May to fall on her sword.



So it goes...


Norm
 
p0lka said:
This sort of stuff makes me weep, the telegraph editor/people in charge know why labour is doing what it is doing, but their agenda is to misinform their readers.
It had a massive impact on the referendum itself, as EU bashing was something certain papers and the governments had been doing for years.

I think people should use 2 different sources for their news, never 1. Echo chambers are bad.
Click to expand...

Yes, Corbyn clearly explained live in the House - and it was in the press in advance - that the reason he declined a GE was to pevent a no-deal Brexit. As soon as the extension was out of the way he would be happy to have a poll, bearing in mind this was a cross-party initiative, not just Labour.

How does the non-domiciled non-Brit owned tabloid press report it?

'CORBYN IS TOO CHICKEN TO CALL AN ELECTION'.

There is the slant, 'let the people decide', which is fair enough but it was e'er the way they don't decide when there'll be an election.
 
ohms said:
Amber Rudd has resigned :

https://twitter.com/AmberRuddHR/status/1170429481879842817

"This short sighted culling of my colleagues has stripped the party of broad-minded and dedicated Conservative MPs. I cannot support this act of political vandalism"
Click to expand...

Sorry to be cynical but she signed up for a no-deal Brexit when she agreed to join BoJo's motley cabinet crew. She has resigned now that BoJo has failed and is on his way out. Rudd is looking for a post in the next cabinet (or shadow cabinet, as the case may be).
 
Tories bid to depose Speaker

The Conservative Party plans to stand a candidate against Speaker John Bercow for his role in allowing MPs to take control of the Commons agenda.

Business secretary Andrea Leadsom accused the Speaker in the Mail on Sunday of "flagrant abuse" of process.

Breaching convention, the party plans to oppose Mr Bercow in his Buckingham constituency at the next election.
Click to expand...

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-49624334
 
What's the point of Parliament passing legislation when the Prime Minister openly says that he will simply ignore it ?

Regarding deposing the speaker, like the GOP in the US, the Conservatives seem to be adopting a scorched earth policy w.r.t. norms when it comes to pushing their agenda through.
 
The government claim that they will test the no no-deal law to the limit but they won't break the law in the process:

The government will "test to the limit" a new law designed to force it to seek an extension to the Brexit deadline if a deal is not reached by 19 October.

Foreign Secretary Dominic Raab said the government will abide by the law but will "look very carefully" at "our interpretation" of the legislation.
Click to expand...

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-49625431

Then again, they said that they wouldn't prorogue parliament in September, even after they had made plans to do so. They simply lie. :mad:

edited to add....

I still think that crashing out with a no-deal on 31 October is still the most likely outcome even if they have to break the law to do so. It doesn't matter if it is done illegally, once the deed is done, there's no going back.
 
Last edited:
Sunday Express is reporting that Boris will 'sabotage' and 'paralyse' the EU if he doesn't get his exit
Apparently he will use the EU’s own rules to bring it to a standstill from November 1 unless the deadlock on Brexit is ended. and that “I refuse to accept Corbyn’s pointless delay.” and vowed to *simply “carry on” if Corbyn again blocks an election.
This seems like it'd be a better fit for the Brexit thread.
 
catsmate said:
:rolleyes:
And yet troops were deployed to Wales, hundreds of them, with a government willing to use them against unarmed civilians. The bitterness is still there.

In Scotland troops, artillery, armoured care and tanks were deployed with the intent of using them if needed.

As for Liverpool I'm referring to the deployment of the Vanguard, with orders to bombard the city "if necessary", and the landing of hundreds of marines and sailors.
Click to expand...

As in there was a fear the police may be overwhelmed and in the end the military was not used and so, not like Peterloo.
 
At least we now know what is really going on and the fight is a clear one between two distinct sides about leaving on the 31st.

Trying to find a deal is now on hold, which is probably a relief for Parliament, as they can get a break from trying to figure out how to solve the impossible.
 
The Conservative members of Wyld Bird Seed are both "soft" Remainers (not thrilled about the EU, but reluctantly accept that it's in the UK's economic interests to stay in). That said, both would rather crash out with no deal than have Jeremy Corbyn as PM.
 
fromdownunder said:
And that is fair enough as far as it goes. But an election in say, early November has a new Government which genuinely wants a deal, never mind what sort for the time being.



New Government elected early November. New Ministers briefed and completely brought up to date with the current state of play (the real one, not the one that is being fed to the public) and decides on new strategy.



This could take until the end of November just to put something together worth taking to the EU. With January 31 as the new deadline, that would leave 60 days to get a signed agreement, or an agreement to have a new referendum, with say a week or so set aside for the Xmas break, then hold the referendum etc...


For something which has not been agreed to in nearly three years? I really can't accept that the January 31 timeline would do anything more require yet a further extension. Sort of let's get an extension until we can work out how much more of an extension we really need. Which is partly what required May to fall on her sword.



So it goes...


Norm
Click to expand...

The chances of an election giving us a government which wants a deal seem slim to none.

The outcomes are either Boris wins and goes for no deal or another hung parliament. The polls are still heavily in favour of the Tories.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom