Or as usual thm doesn't get what the public are on about, news feeds to the ivory tower are slow and the inner tory is conflicted
Mike. The public were clear. We had a vote on it. Did that news not travel to Aus?
Lol again he keeps banging on about it... The public were very undecided they hardly made a decision. The outcomes described are not achievable a nd public opinion is changing. The leavers continue with their bs and hopes with no chance of delivering. Utilising still you seem to want it to happen and have resigned yourself to the shit house situation that will follow. Says more about you than others.
One vote and respect it? We joined the eu. Take your pompous crap and explode your mind on that one for a minute.
52/48 is far from clear.
Do we have to wait for the brexiteers to prove it was bullshit and lies before doing something different?
I genuinely thought that THM and Jambalaya were one and the same person - is that not the case?
Well I reckon they must both be part of the 100k tory party members who think they own the UK's future. #democracy
The public were clear.
Clear on what? Norway style exit, Switzerland style exit or the North Korea style exit we are currently heading for?
I'm sure I heard a lot about Norway and Switzerland during the debates, but very little going over the cliff.
Mike. The public were clear. We had a vote on it. Did that news not travel to Aus?
Repeat it again it might make it true
mikewsmith - Member
Repeat it again it might make it true
definitely will.
Jubilee line WiFi 😉
Brexshit means giving up membership. The means of access still have to be negotiated. That is if the Eu ever get round to that. They are trying to force existing “solutions” none of which suit Uk. We are trying (in vain at the moment) to negotiate a deal suited to uk interests. Odd that so many wish to oppose that.
They are trying to force existing “solutions” none of which suit Uk. We are trying (in vain at the moment) to negotiate a deal suited to uk interests. Odd that so many wish to oppose that.
THM deliberately misses the point again or is too thick to get it. The UK is not in charge, it's a fly in the ointment. No matter how much you hope for a different negotiation it's not going to happen the UK has nothing to offer. Nobody here opposes the plucky idiot approach just we know how it ends, every time you tell us that it's just how the eu negotiations go reminds us of that. Just you don't grasp it, want to complain like the McGregor fans in Vegas or do something useful?
Rather than live in a fantasy Britania rules the waves moment maybe take a proper look, you tell us you have been preparing for months now
THM deliberately misses the point again or is too thick to get it.
he is trolling
There isn't even a coherent "We" in the cabinet still less the country.
Team - you seem well read on all this. How would you solve the Northern Irish issue? (without asking the Republic to (re)join the UK?
How would you solve the Northern Irish issue?
Hello darkness, my old friend
I've come to talk with you again
Because a vision softly creeping
Left its seeds while I was sleeping
And the vision that was planted in my brain
Still remains
Within the sound of silence
There is no easy solution which is why the EU have it as a precondition. Both sides have stated that the terms of the GFA need to be respected but unsurprisingly neither side have a solution
As always it will require a compromise/fudge something that the EU is normally very good at. Equally unsurprisingly they want something definitive now. Odd that, isn’t it? (Well not at all when you think about it)
Mike. Hardly missing the point. Simply sticking to it. Those who hide behind the troll insult continue to ignore th difference between membership of and access to the single market
There is only one key point now. Under what type of arrangement will we continue the have access to the EU and vice versa. WTO, existing FTA arrangements or a specific FTA. Despite all the remoaner BS, we are working towards the latter. But making very little progress. That’s the point as you seem to either have missed it or want to deliberately ignore it
They are trying to force existing “solutions” none of which suit Uk.
I thought the couple were still arguing about the divorce settlement and we hadn't got onto the access issues yet.
Well that’s true. The EUs number #1 focus is the cash and #2 no one else better follow suit
slowoldman - Member
They are trying to force existing “solutions” none of which suit Uk.I thought the couple were still arguing about the divorce settlement and we hadn't got onto the access issues yet.
Correct slow old man. NO talks on any future arrangement can be done before the 3 key issues are settled. Its just a simple fact that there is no possibility of a bespoke deal due to the short timescales left. this is the reality.
any bespoke deal would take years to negotiate and would need agreement of all 27
there has been zero discussion of the future relationship and there will not be until the 3 key issues are solved.
Mays preconditions have also put huge barriers in the way of any future deal
Like I said, you seem very informed on all this. What would your preferred (non-easy) option be?
Given 2 years is not really that long to built some very large lorry parks / IT systems (for Dover and NI).
Every day is a learning day. The preconditions were set by May now 😉
You don’t need to make this up!!
With respect THM, that was just apple-pie-and-motherhood blether that leaves us no closer to a solution, no closer to even conceiving of what a solution might look like.
Of course we are no closer, that’s my point.
We don’t want WTO and none of the existing FTAs suit our needs. So assuming we that Brexshit is going to happen we need to focus on a deal that works for the UK. The EU deliberately wants to avoid this.
Until we start putting flesh on the bones we will have no progress. That is what the EU wants. Their risk is that we might just be stupid/brave (you decide) to walk away. Then the dynamic changes.....
The captain - thats because the is no possible solution that respects the GFA and will be accepted by one of the EU, the DUP and the tories
don't expect anything but bluster and blether from THM.
I'll eat my hat if he can come up with anything remotely plausible on NI
...even if that were the case (which is moot), why the impossibly short timetable? This is big stuff - what would be the problem with taking a couple more years than we've got in order to make preparations and get it right? (Or less wrong.)Until we start putting flesh on the bones we will have no progress. That is what the EU wants.
The solution most likely to be most acceptable to the two parties in the negotiation will be not to leave.
If they can’t sort that there will be tears on at least one side, probably both.
Just sayin and all.
IIRC the timetable is set by A50. It’s far too short obviously hence we are pushing for a sensible transition period - at least 5 years, probably more IMO
Can we go for 100 years extendable on request?
teamhurtmore - Member
Jubilee line WiFiBrexshit means giving up membership. The means of access still have to be negotiated. That is if the Eu ever get round to that. They are trying to force existing “solutions” none of which suit Uk. We are trying (in vain at the moment) to negotiate a deal suited to uk interests. Odd that so many wish to oppose that.
I'm quite happy for there to be an utter shambles of a deal on the table at the end of the negotiations.
That deal needs to get through parliament.
THM what do you think happens if there is no compromise that satisfies both sides?
A transitional period that means delaying our exit for long enough to actually set up a "bespoke FTA" and put border measures in place, especially but not only in Ireland, is what the "grown ups" have suggested, but our politicans are scared stupid of a workable exit that would upset those who see a delayed exit as treason. One (unlikely) result of this, is that different politicans come along and push for our exit being cancelled completely. Unlikely given the timescales and the 'shut up, it's all settled' brigade. The 'write the exit date and time into law' nonsense is all about this.
It sometimes feels like everyone on 'our side', not least those who campaigned to Leave, are doing everything they can to prevent a well managed Brexit… which was always inevitable when we weren't ask to chose between two options, just whether to reject one. Still, let's blame the EU, again.
We have a lose:lose and ST chaos
Best of to avoid that and get on with some sensible discusssions
Mean while we have still not got a Free Yorkshire and its about time we did. There would be £350m a week going to Jimmy's in Leeds once we a re free of the UK.
Kelvin you ar confusing a minority of nutters with the gov’s official line. Not sure if that is deliberate or not
May has proposed delay until 2021 and basically accepting rules and payments during that period as per (IIRC) hence the nutters disquiet
No, she has state that we "must" leave in 2019. Her implementation period has us outside the EU during that time (as does everything Kier and co have suggested so far as well). No politican with clout on either front bench have suggested we delay our "exit the EU" date, despite it being the easiest way to maintain trade and human issues while new arrangements are not just arrived at, but voted on and implemented.
You may be confusing representative government as one form of democracy with democracy itself.
No, I'm saying that 'democracy' is not a single concept, and has many interpretations. And that direct goverment by the people is not a good idea.
THM - a direct question: What proportion of people do you think are sufficiently well-informed to make a rational objective decision on leaving the EU? By rational I mean weighing up the benefits and disadvantages and their likely implications?
May has proposed delay until 2021 and basically accepting rules and payments during that period as per (IIRC) hence the nutters disquiet
My understanding is the same as kelvin's.
Also, May said the transition period would only be put in place IF we have a final deal to transition to which needs to be in place several months before March 2019 so EU leaders can vote it?
But business said it needs to be agreed early next year otherwise they have to start implementing "no-deal plans" anyway?
To me, it looks like we leave with no-deal on March 2019.
I'm quite happy for there to be an utter shambles of a deal on the table at the end of the negotiations.That deal needs to get through parliament.
The ultimate ramification of the deal not going through parliament would be that we would leave the EU without a deal, parliament voted to leave the EU when it agreed to the triggering of Article 50.
a50 is reversible.
The transition CAN only be put in place if we have solved the 3 key conditions. No other negotiations are possible including those over a transition period until the 3 key issues are solved.
Of course any transition is also impossible due to Mays insistence that ECJ has no role to play.
Mays weakness and the ridiculous position she has found herself in due to the delusions of the hardliners mean NO deal is possible and NO transition is possible because the EUs absolute red lines and hers are irreconcilable
Parliament can vote to either ask for the exit date to be delayed, or cancel the whole exit process completely. It'll need a change of government for that though, unless something entirely unexpected happens. Parliament can also vote to change the government.
We either leave with no deal march 2019
Or we ask for an extension of the a50 period
OR enough tory politicians put the needs of the country before the needs of the party and we scrap the whole stupid idea
Edit - or we have a change of government that actually has some sense, negotiates in good faith and get a deal
these are the only possible options.
Mefty - one parliament cannot bind another. If there is a vote in parliament to halt bexit than thats what happens. If its a new government on a platfor that is differnt then thats what happens
And be clear - no deal means no deal. No cross channel planes, no passporting rights for banks, no healthcare rights for UK citizens in the EU,
a50 is reversible.
Not in the view of the Supreme Court, if it was then they wouldn't have forced Theresa May to have a vote on Article 50. Their reason for doing so was that it was irreversible and therefore parliament had to have a say in overturning its own Act. It is all very well saying Lord Kerr who wrote it disagrees, but whilst very eminent in his field, that field was not the law.
