Brexit Negotiations

[antrin]

4 hours ago, Bud the Baker said:

Sorry misunderstanding my fault - he said "An electoral minority protest voted in a referendum" and I meant you can't count non-voters to give yourself a majority.

"arrant, blatant stupidity" strikes again. 

At least you now have similar others on your side, despite that probably being your most dreaded outcome.

[oaksoft]

IT LIVES !!!!! 

[faraway saint]

7 minutes ago, oaksoft said:

IT LIVES !!!!! 

That's a pity. 

[Bud the Baker]

 

Quote

Theresa May has given way to Madrid’s demands over the future of Gibraltar after the Spanish prime minister threatened to “veto” the Brexit deal due to be signed off by EU leaders on Sunday.

On the eve of Sunday’s special Brexit summit, the British ambassador to the EU, Sir Tim Barrow, wrote to concede that Gibraltar would not necessarily be covered by a future trade deal with the EU.

Time for one more climbdown? 

[antrin]

21 hours ago, oaksoft said:

IT LIVES !!!!! 

Furfuxake learn the meaning of 'antrin'.

[Bud the Baker]

On ‎6‎/‎23‎/‎2017 at 10:20 AM, Bud the Baker said:

Well that's us less than a week in and the UK government has already caved in over the sequence of talks wrt the "divorce bill" and citizens rights being sorted before trade discussions begin in October.

The eventual deal will be whatever the EU wants with the UK being left to "take it or leave it" and does anyone really doubt we'll take it?

****************

We were sold a pig in a poke by the Leave camp and is there anybody out there who thinks whatever Brexit we end up with will be better for the UK than what we currently have, yet the general feeling is that we've made our bed and now we've got to lie in it. Not for the first time in my life I'm baffled.

 

 

 

Well I'm not claiming I'm Nostradamus, but I'm Nostradamus amn't I?

[beyond our ken]

On 10/26/2018 at 3:59 PM, Bud the Baker said:

Another newspaper article, reporting on events in the real world (where else) - how many do you want?

There will be no debate, it would have been a struggle to keep the rebate even without Brexit - the UK invoked A50 so there are no longer any UK membership terms to de-cherrypick. 

 

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brexit-eu-budget-rebate-gunther-oetinger-second-referendum-remain-a8580616.html

According to the ECJ advocate general, who presumably lives in the real world, the UK can unilaterally revoke article 50 if it so chooses

What would he know, eh?

Edited December 4, 2018 by beyond our ken

[The Original 59er]

33 minutes ago, beyond our ken said:

According to the ECJ advocate general, who presumably lives in the real world, the UK can unilaterally revoke article 50 if it so chooses

qhat would he know, eh?

So we are at the start of 5 days of debate............... god I think I would fall asleep after 1 day never mind four or five - imagine having to live through 5 days of a Brexit discussions!

Anyway the point of my post is what do we think will be the likely outcome? You have a number of options available to you:

1. The vote is No and the government is sent packing however we are thrown into freefall with the threat of no deal and a Jeremy Corbyn led government!

2. It is a no vote and the government is told to go back and get much better terms.

3. It is a No vote, Theresa May steps down and there is a political in-fight between the Tory Party's finest but we are no further forward

4. It is a no vote and we go back to the nation and say; ok, you have your deal on the table which is really the best we can do (Theresa's been telling us this for the last week) but if you don't like it (and really this is the information we should have had before we voted in or out ages ago) - so we can have another vote for  "in or out" given we now know the deal that the EU will accept.

5. Theresa wins.......................... 

 

Ok at 5, I lost the will to live, but honestly what option do you think will come through?

[beyond our ken]

22 minutes ago, The Original 59er said:

So we are at the start of 5 days of debate............... god I think I would fall asleep after 1 day never mind four or five - imagine having to live through 5 days of a Brexit discussions!

Anyway the point of my post is what do we think will be the likely outcome? You have a number of options available to you:

1. The vote is No and the government is sent packing however we are thrown into freefall with the threat of no deal and a Jeremy Corbyn led government!

2. It is a no vote and the government is told to go back and get much better terms.

3. It is a No vote, Theresa May steps down and there is a political in-fight between the Tory Party's finest but we are no further forward

4. It is a no vote and we go back to the nation and say; ok, you have your deal on the table which is really the best we can do (Theresa's been telling us this for the last week) but if you don't like it (and really this is the information we should have had before we voted in or out ages ago) - so we can have another vote for  "in or out" given we now know the deal that the EU will accept.

5. Theresa wins.......................... 

 

Ok at 5, I lost the will to live, but honestly what option do you think will come through?

The irony is that Theresa is threatening MPs that if they don't accept her deal then she will invoke No Brexit.  The fact that she didn't want the ruling on the legality of revocation to be heard suggests she wanted it to remain a spectre that she couldn't conjure up making her threat empty but allowing her to talk tough.  Now the spectre is reality (almost) she is in a right pickle.   She now has what she always claimed did not exist, a viable option (the most beneficial one for the UK) of staying in on current terms.

I wonder how many leaver politicians wanted this issue left in the cupboard rather than taking the braver decision to see if the option existed.  My expectation is that the politicians are elected to assess information and take decisions on our behalf in the BEST INTERESTS of the country as a whole.  if on inspection Brexit turned out to be the boxed turd many thought it would be then their DUTY is to tell the electorate "sorry folks, but this is mental" and revoke article 50, but they all peddled the line that once it is moving it can't be stopped.  Now they have the information that they didn't want and they really do have to consider what is the best option.

In short, I don't know what will happen in Parliament, butI think the politicians will brick it, kick it back at the people and I expect a second refferendum in Jig time is on the cards on this deal, no deal or stay.

[Bud the Baker]

2 hours ago, beyond our ken said:

According to the ECJ advocate general, who presumably lives in the real world, the UK can unilaterally revoke article 50 if it so chooses

qhat would he know, eh?

Your first worthwhile contribution, but it's just one guys opinion and not binding - I'm sure if does go to the court it'll be disputed..

Quote

The opinion, which is not binding on the court, comes just a week after the case was heard at the ECJ following a referral from Scotland's highest civil court, the Court of Session.

 

This is a new development and doesn't invalidate anything I said previously, all the quotes I posted were from EU politicians about what would happen to our rebate if we changed our decision to leave and asked to rejoin.  

We currently have legally  guaranteed options that allow us enhanced control of our borders compared to other EU countries and to opt out of the Euro which presumably would be still be secure under these new circumstances but the rebate is an ongoing issue subject to continual negotiation at European Council level  - it remains my opinion that it is a dead rebate.

Edited December 4, 2018 by Bud the Baker

[beyond our ken]

1 hour ago, Bud the Baker said:

Your first worthwhile contribution, but it's just one guys opinion and not binding - I'm sure if does go to the court it'll be disputed..

 

This is a new development and doesn't invalidate anything I said previously, all the quotes I posted were from EU politicians about what would happen to our rebate if we changed our decision to leave and asked to rejoin.  

We currently have legally  guaranteed options that allow us enhanced control of our borders compared to other EU countries and to opt out of the Euro which presumably would be still be secure under these new circumstances but the rebate is an ongoing issue subject to continual negotiation at European Council level  - it remains my opinion that it is a dead rebate.

You really are an opinionated, patronising little man (I just patronised you there)

It's not binding, however the AG's opinion is, apparently, hugely influential on the other members of the ECJ.

What is apparent is your tendency to belittle people and play the man.  i don't mind having a debate with you and even acceptiong if I am wrong.  It's your pathetic accusations of "posting shit" or "in the real world" comments that drag the debate down.  i suspect you are comletely incapable of accepting you are wrong, take a look at yourself-you hurled the insults on the basis that you were right and everyone who differed was wrong and now that the legal figures are making their voices heard, indicating that your justification for acting like a smart-arse might not be so rock solid,  you refer to the Advocate General ofthe European Court of Justice' viepoint as "just one guy's opinion"  and then seek to validate your argument by saying you were quoting EU politicians (more fool you).  Unbelievable.

You've been busted pal and you did it to yourself from the start.

 

[Bud the Baker]

21 minutes ago, beyond our ken said:

You really are an opinionated, patronising little man (I just patronised you there)

It's not binding, however the AG's opinion is, apparently, hugely influential on the other members of the ECJ.

What is apparent is your tendency to belittle people and play the man.  i don't mind having a debate with you and even acceptiong if I am wrong.  It's your pathetic accusations of "posting shit" or "in the real world" comments that drag the debate down.  i suspect you are comletely incapable of accepting you are wrong, take a look at yourself-you hurled the insults on the basis that you were right and everyone who differed was wrong and now that the legal figures are making their voices heard, indicating that your justification for acting like a smart-arse might not be so rock solid,  you refer to the Advocate General ofthe European Court of Justice' viepoint as "just one guy's opinion"  and then seek to validate your argument by saying you were quoting EU politicians (more fool you).  Unbelievable.

You've been busted pal and you did it to yourself from the start.

 

Right back at you! 

Today's ruling changes some things as I've admitted - but not not the rebate which as I've already pointed out is not part of the formal Treaty.

Your hastily typed, error strewn, post does not make anything you said back in Octoberany more credible (I guess it's been festering in your head since then)  as the man says - calm down, although I suspect it's probably beyond your ability! 

Edited December 4, 2018 by Bud the Baker

[beyond our ken]

1 minute ago, Bud the Baker said:

Right back at you! 

Today's ruling changes things as I've admitted - but not not the rebate which as I've already pointed out is not part of the formal Treaty.

Your hastily typed, error strewn, post does not make anything you said back in October any more credible, as the man says - calm down, if you can! 

Patronising and opinionated.  As you have personally demonstrated, we all make errors

As I posted in October, there would be give and take if there were an attempt to revoke A.50 as other countries enjoy other dispensations and even blind eyes when it comes to the treaties and arrangements of the EU and this opinion only lends strength to the UK bargaining position SHOULD we choose to push the reset button.

 

You purported the belief that the UK would lose it's rebate if it tried to back-track as fact when it was only opinion (you seeing a pattern here?) and quoted politicians with a vested interest (of all people) as the proof of what happens in the "real world".

I'll leave it there, but doubtless you will succumb to your own smugness and try to salvage something.  If you do, please try and stick to the script and not attack the poster and I might read it.

[Bud the Baker]

41 minutes ago, beyond our ken said:

Patronising and opinionated.  As you have personally demonstrated, we all make errors

As I posted in October, there would be give and take if there were an attempt to revoke A.50 as other countries enjoy other dispensations and even blind eyes when it comes to the treaties and arrangements of the EU and this opinion only lends strength to the UK bargaining position SHOULD we choose to push the reset button.

 

You purported the belief that the UK would lose it's rebate if it tried to back-track as fact when it was only opinion (you seeing a pattern here?) and quoted politicians with a vested interest (of all people) as the proof of what happens in the "real world".

I'll leave it there, but doubtless you will succumb to your own smugness and try to salvage something.  If you do, please try and stick to the script and not attack the poster and I might read it.

No, back in October you said

Quote

If we stay, then surely we stay with the same deal, 

which until today's recommendation was not the accepted opinion as stated by numerous European politicians and even our own Michael Gove.

**************

BTW - Who would make a statement on a situation without having a vested opinion?

Edited December 4, 2018 by Bud the Baker

[beyond our ken]

A judge

[oaksoft]

I think May wanted to block the ECJ ruling today to pressure Labour to vote with her to avoid a no deal Brexit.

She will lose this vote next week and will either go to the country or announce another vote.

If there is another vote I think we will see another much bigger No win and then we will be out for good with immediate effect.

That is my prediction.

[Guest TPAFKATS]

So we are at the start of 5 days of debate............... god I think I would fall asleep after 1 day never mind four or five - imagine having to live through 5 days of a Brexit discussions!
Anyway the point of my post is what do we think will be the likely outcome? You have a number of options available to you:
1. The vote is No and the government is sent packing however we are thrown into freefall with the threat of no deal and a Jeremy Corbyn led government!
2. It is a no vote and the government is told to go back and get much better terms.
3. It is a No vote, Theresa May steps down and there is a political in-fight between the Tory Party's finest but we are no further forward
4. It is a no vote and we go back to the nation and say; ok, you have your deal on the table which is really the best we can do (Theresa's been telling us this for the last week) but if you don't like it (and really this is the information we should have had before we voted in or out ages ago) - so we can have another vote for  "in or out" given we now know the deal that the EU will accept.
5. Theresa wins.......................... 
 
Ok at 5, I lost the will to live, but honestly what option do you think will come through?

Never mind 5 days, it's been around 30 months of almost daily brexit debate since the referendum!

[beyond our ken]

2 hours ago, Bud the Baker said:

No, back in October you said

which until today's recommendation was not the accepted opinion as stated by numerous European politicians and even our own Michael Gove.

**************

BTW - Who would make a statement on a situation without having a vested opinion?

And having looked more and thought more, i said this

" I simply stated there is a debate to be had and there is something for all sides to lose if the EU members want to pull apart and de-cherrypick the UK membership terms."

The discussion moved on, as did I.

As I said before, the opinion expressed today by the AG is a lever that the UK can use, if it chooses

[Bud the Baker]

31 minutes ago, beyond our ken said:

And having looked more and thought more, i said this

" I simply stated there is a debate to be had and there is something for all sides to lose if the EU members want to pull apart and de-cherrypick the UK membership terms."

The discussion moved on, as did I.

As I said before, the opinion expressed today by the AG is a lever that the UK can use, if it chooses

But once upon a time you were sure that "If we stay, then surely we stay with the same deal".

The discussion did indeed move on, as did your opinion (frequently ), until today when a new development triggered your dormant rage!  

Glad you managed to stop pursuing the argument although as ever I'm baffled about what argument you're actually pursuing! 

Edited December 4, 2018 by Bud the Baker

[StanleySaint]

I know the concept may be iconoclastic but I really think it mighg be 4 or 5, of course I am mad!

[Bud the Baker]

On 11/16/2018 at 10:23 AM, Bud the Baker said:

Gove not resigning according to the BBC.

Looking forward to his Hackeresque denial of any interest in the top job.

"While one does not seek the office, one has pledged oneself to the service of one's country. And if one's friends were to persuade one that that was the best way one could serve, one might reluctantly have to accept the responsibility, whatever one's own private wishes might be."

.........................and today from Esther McVey! 

Quote

McVey did not rule out running for the leadership herself, saying she would do so “if people asked me”. She said she was “looking for a person who can unite the party behind the Brexit deal” and said Brexiters should get behind one candidate, but did not name anyone.

 

Edited December 9, 2018 by Bud the Baker

[billyg]

Spoiler

 

 

Good piece from Robert Peston , shows the extent of the complete shambles the country is facing.

You may have thought the vote in Parliament on Tuesday night was an important moment and deadline for how and whether the UK leaves the European Union.

I did. But I was wrong.

Because tomorrow the prime minister may decide to pull the vote (which she can do pretty easily, I am told by a minister, because of the way the motion for the vote is worded).

She will do that, her colleagues inform me, if she is facing defeat by the kind of colossal margin that would completely undermine confidence in her ability to govern - so more than 100 votes.

And right now, the margin of her personal humiliation looks considerably greater than that.

So what would it mean to pull the vote?

Well there is zero chance of her securing the kind of concessions from EU leaders this week at the regular EU council meeting that could turn that scale of Commons defeat into victory.

Sources in European capitals say the most EU government heads could offer would be some non-binding warm words about how they, like the prime minister, hope that the so-called backstop - so hated by Northern Ireland's DUP and Tory Brexiters - will never be implemented or will be of short duration.

Such friendly and supportive words will not turn the DUP and Tory Brexiters from enemies of the Brexit plan to its supporters. All they care about is the legal text of the Withdrawal Agreement. And absent that being opened up and changed - which it won't be this week - they will continue to stand in implacable oppositions to her Brexit plan.

So what can and will she do?

Well - and please move away from the ledge (NOW!) - she could try to re-open negotiations with the EU in a more fundamental way over Christmas and in January.

Because the hard deadline for her is in fact 21 January - which is when (under yet another successful Dominic Grieve initiative, enshrined in the EU Withdrawal Act), if there is no agreed deal, she is obliged to present a plan to parliament about what on earth she does next.

Now it is possible that her own Tory Brexiter MPs will not tolerate her shelving the vote. They want her plan dead and dead now. So they may - finally - see any further prevarication as all the cause they need to try and oust her.

That is the big risk for her, personally.

If she is to keep them on side, she may have to claim that she has been converted to their cause (yes I know that seems implausible).

One idea - put to me by a Whitehall rather than political source - is that she could tell the EU that unless the EU abandons the backstop, the UK would simply leave the EU on 29 March without a transition and via what is known as a hard Brexit, BUT that the UK would refrain from imposing any checks at its borders, either in the island of Ireland or at any of Great Britain's ports.

This would call the EU's bluff: it would mean that if Brexit were to be chaotic and economically disastrous, and if the border in Ireland were to harden in a way that promoted crime and terrorism, that would be at the EU's discretion, not the UK's (it's not a million miles from the tough negotiating stance currently being used by the Swiss, in their attempt to ward off the EU trying to give a greater role to the European Court of Justice in adjudicating single-market disputes - but the Swiss have less to lose than the UK).

This would he the ultimate in hardball negotiating, by May (so yes, implausible again).

It would keep onside most of the Tory Brexiters. But it would probably alienate a majority in parliament, because of the risk that it could all go horribly, appallingly wrong (it could lead to a disastrous Brexit, and could also damage diplomatic relations between the UK and EU for years to come).

The point, which you surely know by now, is that there is no Brexit available that doesn't alienate at least one constituency deemed important by the prime minister.

She attempted a Brexit whose explicit aim was to reconcile irreconcilable groups (Brexiters and DUP on the one hand, Remainers on the other; the EU 27 and Brexit voters). That failed. Her negotiated plan is in the dustbin of history.

To Brexit is to choose. May can duck her choice no longer (or at least not for very much longer!).

[Bud the Baker]

46 minutes ago, billyg said:

  Reveal hidden contents

 

 

Good piece from Robert Peston , shows the extent of the complete shambles the country is facing.

You may have thought the vote in Parliament on Tuesday night was an important moment and deadline for how and whether the UK leaves the European Union.

I did. But I was wrong.

Because tomorrow the prime minister may decide to pull the vote (which she can do pretty easily, I am told by a minister, because of the way the motion for the vote is worded).

She will do that, her colleagues inform me, if she is facing defeat by the kind of colossal margin that would completely undermine confidence in her ability to govern - so more than 100 votes.

And right now, the margin of her personal humiliation looks considerably greater than that.

So what would it mean to pull the vote?

Well there is zero chance of her securing the kind of concessions from EU leaders this week at the regular EU council meeting that could turn that scale of Commons defeat into victory.

Sources in European capitals say the most EU government heads could offer would be some non-binding warm words about how they, like the prime minister, hope that the so-called backstop - so hated by Northern Ireland's DUP and Tory Brexiters - will never be implemented or will be of short duration.

Such friendly and supportive words will not turn the DUP and Tory Brexiters from enemies of the Brexit plan to its supporters. All they care about is the legal text of the Withdrawal Agreement. And absent that being opened up and changed - which it won't be this week - they will continue to stand in implacable oppositions to her Brexit plan.

So what can and will she do?

Well - and please move away from the ledge (NOW!) - she could try to re-open negotiations with the EU in a more fundamental way over Christmas and in January.

Because the hard deadline for her is in fact 21 January - which is when (under yet another successful Dominic Grieve initiative, enshrined in the EU Withdrawal Act), if there is no agreed deal, she is obliged to present a plan to parliament about what on earth she does next.

Now it is possible that her own Tory Brexiter MPs will not tolerate her shelving the vote. They want her plan dead and dead now. So they may - finally - see any further prevarication as all the cause they need to try and oust her.

That is the big risk for her, personally.

If she is to keep them on side, she may have to claim that she has been converted to their cause (yes I know that seems implausible).

One idea - put to me by a Whitehall rather than political source - is that she could tell the EU that unless the EU abandons the backstop, the UK would simply leave the EU on 29 March without a transition and via what is known as a hard Brexit, BUT that the UK would refrain from imposing any checks at its borders, either in the island of Ireland or at any of Great Britain's ports.

This would call the EU's bluff: it would mean that if Brexit were to be chaotic and economically disastrous, and if the border in Ireland were to harden in a way that promoted crime and terrorism, that would be at the EU's discretion, not the UK's (it's not a million miles from the tough negotiating stance currently being used by the Swiss, in their attempt to ward off the EU trying to give a greater role to the European Court of Justice in adjudicating single-market disputes - but the Swiss have less to lose than the UK).

This would he the ultimate in hardball negotiating, by May (so yes, implausible again).

It would keep onside most of the Tory Brexiters. But it would probably alienate a majority in parliament, because of the risk that it could all go horribly, appallingly wrong (it could lead to a disastrous Brexit, and could also damage diplomatic relations between the UK and EU for years to come).

The point, which you surely know by now, is that there is no Brexit available that doesn't alienate at least one constituency deemed important by the prime minister.

She attempted a Brexit whose explicit aim was to reconcile irreconcilable groups (Brexiters and DUP on the one hand, Remainers on the other; the EU 27 and Brexit voters). That failed. Her negotiated plan is in the dustbin of history.

To Brexit is to choose. May can duck her choice no longer (or at least not for very much longer!).

Read similar articles too although I don't see how "pulling" the vote is less humiliating. 

[Bud the Baker]

ECJ confirms we can unilaterally revoke A50, however it May (sic) be kicked upstairs  to the ESC - acronym paradise!

Quote

The emergency judgment came the day before the critical Commons vote on Theresa May’s Brexit deal and will be reviewed urgently by Scotland’s civil court in Edinburgh. That process will kickstart what is expected to be a last-ditch legal battle by the UK government, which is likely to end in the supreme court.

Best option would be for us to do a Dallas and pretend the last two years have all been a dream! 

[DougJamie]

29 minutes ago, Bud the Baker said:

ECJ confirms we can unilaterally revoke A50, however it May (sic) be kicked upstairs  to the ESC - acronym paradise!

Best option would be for us to do a Dallas and pretend the last two years have all been a dream! 

Theressa May coming out a shower  What a minging thought