Army Rumour Service

Register a free account today to join our community
Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site, connect with other members through your own private inbox and will receive smaller adverts!

Brexit Phase Two - Trade

Status
Not open for further replies.
They didn’t but what’s the point when they still don’t

Unless your going to put a deal to the people

And remember the deal that was voted down tonight is only supposed to last 2 years

The operative part.

If it were true, the EU would have had no objection to a time limit on the so-called "backstop".
 
Brexit from a U.S.perspective. G'nite.

"
For US viewers, it's kind of like if the Republican party held a national referendum that said "repeal and replace Obamacare in two years", and the vote passed.
Then then they're on the hook to do the actual replacement part and realize that there never was a replacement but they have this hard deadline to get it done.

The fact that the vote was held at all is total madness. They were trying to call a bluff and it blew up in their face. The whole "post fact era" thing only works up until you the point where you need to actually implement policy."

Says it all really.Enjoy all.

Not a bad analogy, as both could have been achieved if our respective political masters had more than a modicum of ability.
 
No PM has ever been directly elected, as you well know. The leader of the party which achieves the most votes is appointed by HMQ.

I know. But OP I replied to was complaining about some EU posts being appointments by elected officials, rather than directly elected. Which in itself is not undemocratic.
 
RE Michael Gove becoming a turncoat, a commentator has made a very good point. It is easy for those on the back benches to support No Deal, as they are not having to deal with the realities.

Gove, however, is involved in Brexit planning, in one of the Depts most affected by Brexit. This may have tainted his views.
That's why they all ran away from government, Gove and Fox excepted
 
So hard brexit or no brexit.

Hard brexit will have the upside of fully exposing the scale of the con perpetrated on the British people.

No brexit doesn't need explaining in terms of positives.
 
'Oh wad some Power the giftie'd gie us
Tae see oorsels as others see Us.....'



from the Washington Examiner:

Brexit vote debacle puts Theresa May and the UK in a tough, but not catastrophic, corner
Brexit vote debacle puts Theresa May and the UK in a tough, but not catastrophic, corner
by Tom Rogan | January 15, 2019 03:16


PM Prime Minister Theresa May's Brexit deal suffered an overwhelming parliamentary rejection on Tuesday, a rejection on the scale of Michael Dukakis's rejection in 1988.
The consequences for Brexit, as a reality as much as anything, are highly significant. May must now return to the House of Commons within the next week to offer a pathway forward.


If she fails to do so, members of Parliament will put forward their own alternatives for a vote. But as a first step, expect May to travel to meet top European Union officials in Brussels. May will beg, bribe (offering more money for EU projects post-2019), and cajole (perhaps threatening a hard Brexit and a cessation of much-needed intelligence alliances) the EU to give her more clarity on the so-called Irish backstop.

The backstop pertains to a possible border arrangement between Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland, to enter into force if Britain and the EU cannot agree on a final status deal on all affairs by the end of 2020. But the backstop is deeply unpopular in Parliament, with many of May's fellow Conservative Party MPs believing it is incompatible with British sovereignty.

May will now hope that the EU will give her some new concessions with which to consolidate MP concerns over the backstop and rally enough MPs to her corner for any new vote. Will the EU agree to this? Beyond some small word changes, I doubt it. The EU believes it has given May all it can give her and has little incentive to give more.

The political union has a vested interest in making Britain suffer. It hopes that by showing the other 27 EU states the costs of withdrawal, other separatist movements on the continent will lose power.

The EU elites are ultimately interested in forming a United States of Europe, not a continuation of the present EU form. That interest drives their hard-bargaining with May.

So, assuming May cannot get EU concessions to alter the parliamentary math, where does that leave Britain? Well, in a tough situation, but not a catastrophic one.
While a vote of no confidence in the government will be held on Wednesday, the opposition Labour Party lacks the votes to win that vote and force an election.


Yet, the fundamental problem for May is that she remains caught between two divergent blocs in Parliament: her own backbench Conservative MPs, many of whom favor a hard Brexit with a greater split from the EU, and others who want a closer alignment.

I suspect May will come back from Brussels with a slightly altered deal but that she will warn Conservative MPs that if her new deal is rejected, she will accept softBrexit compromises offered by other MPs.

But the stakes and complexities here are immense. As one of May's Cabinet officers put it, "Winter is coming."

And let's be clear, as time goes on and the political uncertainties grow, the possibility of a second referendum will grow. In that scenario, Brexit itself might evaporate.
 
Brexit from a U.S.perspective. G'nite.

"
For US viewers, it's kind of like if the Republican party held a national referendum that said "repeal and remove Obamacare in two years", and the vote passed.

Says it all really.Enjoy all.

Slight edit. How would that go down in the US?
 
I can definitely trump that. When I was about 12 a wee Glesga lassie of around 13 offered me 'my hole' for half a crown. Even if I had had two and six I had to ask a pal what she meant, by which time the offer had either been withdrawn or she had found another client :roll:

ETA: a few weeks later I made 2/6p helping the Brickette man one Saturday...………..went straight to the toy shop and bought a roy rogers gun (with caps).
Which hole?
 
Summed up in a single sentence:

“Theresa May was asked to turn a campaign of lies into political reality”
Er, no.

She was asked to deliver the will of the people.

I stopped reading the article when it trotted out the standard drivel about 'xenophobia '.

However, if it's premise is to be believed 'there is no mutually beneficial agreement to be had' why are they suggesting staying in?

If UK and eu can't even thrash out an acceptable deal for us to leave, why would we stay?

Except in the mind of a raving lunatic, this is quite clearly a daft course of action.
 
Last edited:
RE Michael Gove becoming a turncoat, a commentator has made a very good point. It is easy for those on the back benches to support No Deal, as they are not having to deal with the realities.

Gove, however, is involved in Brexit planning, in one of the Depts most affected by Brexit. This may have tainted his views.
Wanting to be PM has tainted his views.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top