Cont: Brexit: Now What? 7th heaven...

Status
Not open for further replies.
dudalb said:
I think May's appeal to the people over the heads of parliament is a really lame attempt to use Trumpian tactics. It is not going to work.
Click to expand...

She has definitely copied the 'let's stand in front of a podium and make out there's to be an address to the nation Churchill-style' from Trump. I knew straight away it would be delayed about half an hour with BBC's Ben Brown bobbing about at the door of No. 10 Downing Street trying to drum up some suspense - as May intended - and that as usual it would be an complete non sequitur of no substance.

You could see it in May's demeanour. Huh, you thought I was going to announce my resignation or a general election, idiots. Wrong again! Blah blah blah. A few meaningless soundbites, Huff of the shoulders. Turn and walk off pronto.
 
dudalb said:
Nice attempt to excuse Corbyn's childish behavior. he damaged himself quite a bit with that stunt. Corbyn does a great job of undeerminng his own credibtility without May getting involved.
Click to expand...

Disagree. As much as I like Ummana (_sp?) he resigned from the Labour Party and now he is presenting himself as Corbyn's equal, only invited by May to wind up Jeremy for a laugh.
 
angrysoba said:
I don’t see any offer of a long extension from him. The suggestion of a short extension doesn’t look like an inclusive set of options, but an exclusive one. In other words: it’s the deal we offered you or no deal.
Click to expand...
No surprise there. From the EU POV there has never been more than those two options on the table: Mrs May and Mr Barnier's deal or no deal. And unsurprisingly neither the various House of Commons votes nor the better deal that Mr Corbyn made with himself (or Mrs May last minute requests) modified that POV.
 
Last edited:
Castro said:
No surprise there. From the EU POV there has never been more than those two options on the table: Mrs May and Mr Barnier's deal or no deal. And unsurprisingly neither the various House of Commons votes nor the better deal that Mr Corbyn made with himself (or Mrs May last minute requests) modified that POV.
Click to expand...

They knew May was desperate to get a Brexit deal through at any price, as was her mandate, and thus had the upper hand. They made her accept a defective weak deal rather than go back empty handed.

The 'stupid woman' - as Dominic Grieve once astutely called her - is too vain to admit she has sold the country short and has been too untalented as a leader to inspire anybody except the likes of Stephen Barclay and lick spittle Michael Gove.
 
dudalb said:
I think May's appeal to the people over the heads of parliament is a really lame attempt to use Trumpian tactics. It is not going to work.
Click to expand...

May has to be desperate or deluded to try an appeal to popularity
 
Even the Merkel lackeys at SPIEGEL are now writing that before the 29th, either UK has to accept the deal or May has to resign, new UK elections be called and the UK has to take part in the upcoming EU elections late May. Otherwise, it's good bye without flowers.
 
Vixen said:
They knew May was desperate to get a Brexit deal through at any price, as was her mandate, and thus had the upper hand. They made her accept a defective weak deal rather than go back empty handed.

The 'stupid woman' - as Dominic Grieve once astutely called her - is too vain to admit she has sold the country short and has been too untalented as a leader to inspire anybody except the likes of Stephen Barclay and lick spittle Michael Gove.
Click to expand...
In my opinion, she is not completely without merit, because she has been seeking what she calls an "orderly Brexit", and has been maintaining constant dialogue with the EU, thereby trying to protect the people, like she says. But I think she is making a major strategic mistake by putting all the blame on the poor British parliament. During her next meeting in Brussels, she should bang on the table, and finally demand a proper deal, approvable by her parliament, for example with a time-limited backstop (though it is perhaps a little hard for a lady to do such a thing - the banging part).
 
This whole mess is because the polticians did not want the responsibility of deciding on whether to stay in the EU or not, and tried to pass the buck with the referendum.
 
Michel H said:
<snip>

During her next meeting in Brussels, she should bang on the table, and finally demand a proper deal, approvable by her parliament, for example with a time-limited backstop (though it is perhaps a little hard for a lady to do such a thing - the banging part).
Click to expand...


I don't see why.

She's got perfectly good shoes. No need to chance hurting her hand.
 
Michel H said:
In my opinion, she is not completely without merit, because she has been seeking what she calls an "orderly Brexit", and has been maintaining constant dialogue with the EU, thereby trying to protect the people, like she says. But I think she is making a major strategic mistake by putting all the blame on the poor British parliament. During her next meeting in Brussels, she should bang on the table, and finally demand a proper deal, approvable by her parliament, for example with a time-limited backstop (though it is perhaps a little hard for a lady to do such a thing - the banging part).
Click to expand...

What do you think everybody wanted from her and Brits? Reminder: Portion of Deal (Irish backstop) was May's idea!

We are not responsible fort terminal idiocy of Brits, that they can't agree on anything including what they want...
 
I'll posit the suggestion that May, who was a remainer initially, has been deliberately bolloxing this process so as to make the whole thing fail and fail spectacularly while making the ratbags like Rees-Mogg and Farage the villains of the piece. Not only will the Brexit deadline get extended, that extension will eventually go on indefinitely...on and on...until everyone realises the UK is never ever leaving at all and everyone can go back to where they were before the thing flared up.
 
Michel H said:
During her next meeting in Brussels, she should bang on the table, and finally demand a proper deal, approvable by her parliament, for example with a time-limited backstop (though it is perhaps a little hard for a lady to do such a thing - the banging part).
Click to expand...
What do you mean "A proper deal"? Her deal is leaving the EU, we have no say in running it but everything else stays the same. Which parts if that would you change to make it proper that the EU would see table banging as a reason to accept?
There is no problem time limiting the backstop. The problem is what happens when the backstop ends if nothing else is agreed. What is the backstop's backstop? At the moment I think technology and practicality suggests either we carry on as if we were members with no say but all the benefits and obligations (current backstop) or leave with a hard brexit. You really want a hard brexit? What alternatives do you have for a hard brexit when the backstop ends. Remember you need to be specific when you write the agreement about what will happen.
 
Michel H said:
In my opinion, she is not completely without merit, because she has been seeking what she calls an "orderly Brexit", and has been maintaining constant dialogue with the EU, thereby trying to protect the people, like she says. But I think she is making a major strategic mistake by putting all the blame on the poor British parliament. During her next meeting in Brussels, she should bang on the table, and finally demand a proper deal, approvable by her parliament, for example with a time-limited backstop (though it is perhaps a little hard for a lady to do such a thing - the banging part).
Click to expand...

In which case she'll be told (well has been told already), that in that case the UK gets to leave the 29th without a deal.
Because no matter the empty vote in the UK parliament saying they do not want this, the UK already signed the law that mandates this happening.
 
Norman Alexander said:
So not driving the bus over the cliff, but backing it over the cliff while trying not to drive forward.
Click to expand...

More like parking it right on the edge of the cliff where the cracks are starting to appear, then spinning out the argument on which exit of the car park to drive it out of until the cliff edge collapses.

Dave
 
"The government has been described as sick and uncaring by an organisation representing more than 10,000 British nationals in Europe over NHS healthcare plans for pensioners in a no-deal Brexit scenario.

British nationals who have retired to EU countries have reacted with fury to what they describe as an insulting and offensive offer by the government to cover healthcare costs for up to one year if they had applied for or are undergoing treatment before exit day."

Charming. Get diagnosed with any serious illness after no-deal Brexit day and you'd have to return to the UK for treatment, possibly on a regular basis. Smells like Hunt's work, or maybe IDS. Somebody who doesn't give a **** about others. I wonder what ******** dreamt it up?
 
Lothian said:
What do you mean "A proper deal"? Her deal is leaving the EU, we have no say in running it but everything else stays the same. Which parts if that would you change to make it proper that the EU would see table banging as a reason to accept?
There is no problem time limiting the backstop. The problem is what happens when the backstop ends if nothing else is agreed. What is the backstop's backstop? At the moment I think technology and practicality suggests either we carry on as if we were members with no say but all the benefits and obligations (current backstop) or leave with a hard brexit. You really want a hard brexit? What alternatives do you have for a hard brexit when the backstop ends. Remember you need to be specific when you write the agreement about what will happen.
Click to expand...

There are options that could be done, but are utterly unacceptable to DUP or British Parliament.

1. The backstop applies to NI only.
2. The backstop can be overturned by a referendum in NI. The referendum must have a 60% treshold to end the backstop, allow ranking of choices and must include Irish reunification as an option.

EU already suggested the first option, but Theresa May, in her infinite* wisdom, declined. I think EU might agree to the second as well, but same problem applies. DUP will never agree to it, no British PM would. There's one more I can think of:

3. Time-limit the backstop to 2100. This kicks the can down the road far enough not to be anyone's problem. It may be acceptable. It's not a good solution, but it might work. The necessary technology should be implementable before that date.

* infinitely small, unless she really is trying to stop Brexit altogether. We'll see in just over a week.

McHrozni
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom