[Closed] EU Referendum - are you in or out?

A well put piece in the Guardian today said Britain has a choice... destroy its democracy to protect its economy, or destroy its economy to protect its democracy

Brilliant!

Still.... the man who’s monumental arrogance and lack of judgement delivered this madness has just bought himself a 2 million quid third home in Cornwall, which is nice

[url= http://www.thedailymash.co.uk/politics/politics-headlines/brexiter-strangely-quiet-about-voting-for-obvious-****s-20171114139077 ]Another interesting take on it[/url]

Bill Cash should hang his head in shame, invoking armistice and remembrance to support his petty political ends. Shame on him.

I hope the less dictated members are not put off by the idea of line by line scrutiny nor by the 000s of amendments. Time to prove their worth. And if their bored they could also get a bit sweaty about the date of leaving. That could pass a couple of hours and it's not as though the answer is obvious.

Haven't seen any coverage But I assume that the chamber is packed given the importance of the scrutiny required.

Bill Cash should hang his head in shame, invoking armistice and remembrance to support his petty political ends. Shame on him.

The same thing happened here on Sunday by a gagger. Shocking, I agree.

Trust that’s not the Independent piece i referenced THM.
Very trolly headline but the substance had some validity. Unlike Cash

Yeah it is. Seems an odd time to potentially anger Trump.

And I'm surprised she'd want to bring to much focus on it herself, given the speculated links between Russia and the Brexit vote.

I expect she’s preparing to sign the cheque and walk ...

No 😉 one of the posse!!

But would not surprise me as the Indy and the Guardian compete daily for the silliest most sensational headline and then lose out to Gideons Gobshite instead!!!

So when I get home will I be seeing a packed chamber on the tele?

Turned it on. - looks like almost 50. Good for them.

Might go back to master chef or the Wendy instead though.

Still.... the man who’s monumental arrogance and lack of judgement delivered this madness has just bought himself a 2 million quid third home in Cornwall, which is nice

Think of he devaluation and the savings he's made on the back of it, onshoring some of the trust fund.

do keep us updated on what you are doing as I am, and I am sure I speak for the forum, on the edge of my seat waiting for your next tweet/update

I just had some toast after buying a frame ...oh this is as exciting as it is relevant

Chief whip is an ardent remainder BTW.

He’s an ardent pud puller who will do anything that leads to greater power. My local MP. Useless. Saying that, his secretary is good at cutting and pasting.

..if their bored they could also get a bit sweaty about the date of leaving. That could pass a couple of hours and it's not as though the answer is obvious.

Sorry I'm failing to detect your tone THM.

Are you saying the answer [i]is[/i] obvious? Why?

Do you agree with Dominic Grieve that the unnecessary setting of a exit date fetters ministers hands?

https://www.standard.co.uk/comment/comment/dominic-grieve-to-tie-ourselves-to-a-brexit-date-is-both-pointless-and-dangerous-a3690616.html

It's all idiotic posturing and much more about who thinks they have support rather than anything meaningful in terms of brexit. We either withdraw A50 or leave on the appointed date and it makes not a jot of difference what statements are made and which laws are passed in the meantime.

Graham. Yes blindingly.

We either withdraw A50 or leave on the appointed date

Or agree a different date with the EU if both sides think it is required and the best course of action for all sides.

And if their bored they could also get a bit sweaty about the date of leaving. That could pass a couple of hours and it's not as though the answer is obvious.

Is this one a riddle? Did you think of it yourself, or use some kind of primitive AI?

It’s almost as if the government believe A50 is retractable and want to stick a date in primary legislation to make that harder to do.

Can’t be. Can it?

Graham. Yes blindingly.

Okay. Could you possibly expand on that a little for those who don't think it is so clear (i.e. Me)?

It’s simple - add two

Simple but noisy obviously

unless the European Council, in agreement with the Member State concerned, unanimously decides to extend this period.

True

Are you being deliberately cryptic for some reason THM?

To quote some of the well reasoned objection that suggests to me it is less obvious:

Hilary Benn (Chair of the Exiting the EU Select Committee among other things):

"When the Secretary of State appeared before the Select Committee, he told us that it is possible that the negotiations may go to the 59th minute of the 11th hour. That is undoubtedly possible. In those circumstances, does it really make sense to bind the hands of the country and those who are negotiating on its behalf to get the best possible deal, which is also the weakness of the Government’s own amendment 383?"

Dominic Grieve:

"I am most grateful to my hon. Friend. Does he recognise that there are two different issues relating to exit day? Some of the amendments were tabled to express the fear that there might be multiple exit dates. That is very different from fixing a day. Obviously, under article 50 there is an expiry date, but, as my hon. Friend knows, article 50 itself contains provision for a possible extension of the period if that is what is needed to conclude an agreement. That is why I find the Government’s amendment so strange. It seems to me to fetter the Government, to add nothing to the strength of their negotiating position, and, in fact, potentially to create a very great problem that could be visited on us at a later stage."

No

It's really not difficult. Kelvin and I just used fewer words than Grieve.

Okay, fair enough. I thought you had an actual point to make.

Grieve was far more complete though, as regards why the government shouldn't try and remove possible tools to a achieving an agreed deal. Deadlines should be delayable where a successful outcome is more important, to all sides, than an arbitrary cut off. He can also have a place in the emergency government when we need it, please.

I think I answered why the government want a date in the bill. It’s nothing to do with the date.

Okay, fair enough. I thought you had an actual point to make.

Are you new around here?

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/nov/14/sex-slang-steak-views-leave-remain-worlds-apart

Wow was that a survey from threads on stw?

Excellent contribution Dr, well done. A step up...

Deadlines should be delayable where a successful outcome is more important

As you said earlier Kelvin the deadlines are not set by us. So the whole debate is pointless. We have an exit date. We don’t have details on the transition. That’s were focus should be.

. So the whole debate is pointless. We have an exit date. We don’t have details on the transition. That’s were focus should be.

As a significant number of people believe if the car crash/nuclear option is on the table the call it all off one should be too. We all know you hate the idea of people changing their minds once the facts are presented but it's something responsible governments should consider.

Keeping making stuff up

But you are partially correct about the outcome - Brexshit. What we don’t know is the terms and despite what you say there is not a single outcome, there are several variations. It would be good if we could get on with negotiating that.

The last polls suggest that people want the process concluded ASAP even remainers. So we still have to see his massive change of minds

And day 1 of the scrutiny already passed. It was illuminating wasn’t it

We have given the explanation - if you want to stay lost in the noise that’s your choice

Excellent contribution Dr, well done.

Akin to dismissing something as "blindingly obvious" and "simple" without any further explanation or discussion?

FWIW the Chair of the Brexit Select Committee seems to think it is less obvious, that it runs directly contrary to evidence given by the Secretary of State for Exiting the European Union, and binds the hands of our negotiators unnecessarily.

I'd have been interested to hear your take on that.

and in new news, Brexit is now going to be green

A new environment watchdog to protect UK wildlife, land, water and air once Britain leaves the European Union is being planned by the government.
Environment Secretary Michael Gove said the body would hold the powerful to account and deliver a green Brexit.
The plans come amid concerns that environmental regulations enshrined in EU law could be lost after Brexit.
Mr Gove told the Andrew Marr Show standards would not be sacrificed as part of a potential US free trade deal.

Same as before

You can go to the EU website and see the full timetable. It hasn’t changed

And we know who can and who cannot change it. We also know what happens if no deal is reached

More bad news for the [s]truthers[/s] leavers
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/nov/14/honda-uk-warns-mps-of-consequences-of-leaving-eu-customs-union

We have the bankers leaving in droves, UK manufcturers and the CBI stating what a disaster it will be and the 3 amigos still refuse to aknowledge anything is wrong

Also the wants of the business leavers made clear -0 scrap worker and environmental protection

http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/sir-james-dyson-brexit_uk_5a08336fe4b01d21c83eff64

Alternatively - banks have scaled back their relocation plans, the French now arguing that fragmenting clearing is a bad idea (this morning) and DD suggesting a deal with bankers yesterday over special travel plans at the UBS conference

Not that remoaners are interested in facts of course

Mind the flood of bankers!!!!

The last polls suggest that people want the process concluded ASAP even remainers. So we still have to see his massive change of minds

Last week at least the polls also suggested on balance that people think leaving is a bad idea.

Remember we checked that THM?

Yes and we also saw what they want the gov to do - even the remainers

don't confuse THM with awkward facts. Its unfair on him

THM: the debate (as I'm sure you know) wasn't about what Article 50 + 2 years added up to.

It was about whether we should be enshrining that date into UK Law as part of the primary legislation.

Our Brexit secretary says that negotiations will run to the 59th minute of the eleventh hour.

So why make law that further impedes our negotiators if things are running a "minute" or two late? How does that help them get the best deal?

[img] [/img]
More enemies of the people time, how very dare they question and challenge, don't they know it's going to make us late

The Independent describes bad-tempered exchanges during last night's debate in the Commons, which it says regularly spilled over into the question of Brexit itself.
The newspaper quotes the former Attorney General, Dominic Grieve, calling it "an extraordinarily painful process of national self-mutilation I'm required to facilitate".
The Daily Express says Labour's leader in the European Parliament has let slip a secret plot to stop Brexit.
It says Richard Corbett wants to ensure Britain remains a full EU member during a two-year "transition period" in the hope the time can be used to overturn the referendum result.

Well let’s think of leaving is a bad idea and they want the government to bring things to a conclusion - what would fit both of those?

Is there anything obvious?

No?

No point at all Graham.

Never said otherwise. I am aware who sets the timetable and who is able to change it. As before, it’s very simple

Why both sides are getting sweaty about it beats me. But his whole process is becoming farcical

Perhaps we may eventually get down to what is important ie negotiating the terms of our access and vv

Here’s hoping