The UK Politics & Brexit Thread

[Alfie]

............................................................................................................................................

I'd rather you ignore my posts as I will yours, Thank you.

 

[markjay]

Corbyn now supports a second referendum, in order to appease his Remainer MPs and mitigate the risk of Labour becoming disintegrated.

But this means he is now running a risk of losing popular support for Labour come next GE.

Some conundrum...

 

[Alfie]

The euro aspect of what happens in 2020 is covered here:

After 2020, all EU members will have to adopt the euro

Interesting article, thanks.

 

[st13phil]

Has anyone read the Lisbon treaty?

From here (thanks to @SPX who posted the link a couple of weeks ago:

When the proposed European Constitution was rejected by voters in France and Holland (most government did not even allow a vote) this meant nothing to ‘the Project’. A few cosmetic tweaks, and it was imposed anyway; now it was called ‘the Lisbon Treaty’.

and...

As Valéry Giscard d’Estaing, the former French president who drafted the EU Constitution wrote in The Independent (‘The EU Treaty is the same as the Constitution’):

"The legal experts for the European Council … charged with drafting the new text … have not made any new suggestions. They have taken the original draft constitution, blown it apart into separate elements, and have then attached them, one by one, to existing treaties. The Treaty of Lisbon is thus a catalogue of amendments. It is unpenetrable for the public.

In terms of content, the proposed institutional reforms – the only ones which mattered to the drafting Convention – are all to be found in the Treaty of Lisbon. They have merely been ordered differently and split up between previous treaties."​

​

So, unless you're being paid to decipher it and have access to all the other treaties that have been amended by it, I would suspect that the answer to your question is "probably not".

 

[Scott_F]

I'd rather you ignore my posts as I will yours, Thank you.

If you post stuff that isn't true and ask whether anyone else has heard the same then you can expect a response.

If you don't want a response then don't ask for one.

 

[Alfie]

If you post stuff that isn't true and ask whether anyone else has heard the same then you can expect a response.

If you don't want a response then don't ask for one.

Sorry. I'll make myself a little clearer.

I'd rather you ignore my posts as I will yours, Thank you.

 

[BIG Sean]

Has anyone read the Lisbon treaty? I'm hearing lots of comments about what happens in 2020. Apparently all states have to adopt the euro, accept EU law as supreme, lose the veto, lose national identity and no longer recognise the commonwealth! Basically the 'United states of Europe'.

Anyone heard similar?

The United States of Germany

 

[Alfie]

Just heard that Mrs May will allow the commons to vote on no deal and Brexit extension if her deal is rejected!

I'm struggling to see how she can make more of a mess of this than she already has. She probably will though!

 

[m80]

I would say that it's undeniable that May is and has been playing a time game. With any vote, meaningful or not, being so close to the last chance for change she is giving the 2 options of the May deal or nowt. As she is seemingly adamant that she is against any deferral of Brexit that's what's left.
As she was promoting her deal, as ridiculous as it was / is, some tinkering to save some face of our MP's by the eu and our Parliament will be left with having to accept what's on offer. I can't see enough power in any movement to go WTO.
There will be tears.

Edit,
sorry was seemingly adament.

 

[geraldrobins]

Just heard that Mrs May will allow the commons to vote on no deal and Brexit extension if her deal is rejected!

I'm struggling to see how she can make more of a mess of this than she already has. She probably will though!

Its easy to say shes made a mess of it but is there a deal that parliament would accept.

 

[Dryce]

Its easy to say shes made a mess of it but is there a deal that parliament would accept.

I think it's notable that the breakaway Labour and Conservatives don't represent a deadlock breaking group - but more just one of the 'cannot come to terms with the public vote in the Euref' factions.

You might have thought given the circumstances that a group of Brexit supporting MPs might have disengaged from their party - and had a differentiation from the rest of parliament.

Instead we have rather the rather pathetic and unimpressive 'The Independent Group' which isn't actually offering up anything substantial on the most critical issue of the day apart from disaffection with their respective leaderships. They are irrelevant to the public and more a product of the inward looking parliament.

I think if UKIP had held itself together and not melted down post EUref then right now it would be doing rather frightning well in the polls at the moment. That would be giving both Mr Corbyn and Ms May quite a bit to think about - and might well have galvanised the rest of parliament as well.

 

[markjay]

I think it's notable that the breakaway Labour and Conservatives don't represent a deadlock breaking group - but more just one of the 'cannot come to terms with the public vote in the Euref' factions.

You might have thought given the circumstances that a group of Brexit supporting MPs might have disengaged from their party - and had a differentiation from the rest of parliament.

Instead we have rather the rather pathetic and unimpressive 'The Independent Group' which isn't actually offering up anything substantial on the most critical issue of the day apart from disaffection with their respective leaderships. They are irrelevant to the public and more a product of the inward looking parliament.

I think if UKIP had held itself together and not melted down post EUref then right now it would be doing rather frightning well in the polls at the moment. That would be giving both Mr Corbyn and Ms May quite a bit to think about - and might well have galvanised the rest of parliament as well.

UKIP pushed for Brexit, but after the referendum they rightly became a spent force.

Of all political parties, UKIP are the most ill-equipped to negotiate with the EU.

As the number one Brexit supporter, they could not and would not have settled for anything less than a 'good deal".

But then it turned out that the fantastic deal that Farage promised us was not possible... but for UKIT to end-up with a bad deal or a no-deal, would have been a massive humble pie compared to their pre-referndum promises. They would have found themselves in the impossible position of having built-up great expectations that they can't deliver on.

It is only sensible that the negotiations were left for those who didn't promise the moon and their hands are not tied in trying to reach a more down to earth and practical deal with the EU.

 

[Dryce]

UKIP pushed for Brexit, but after the referendum they rightly became a spent force.

Of all political parties, UKIP are the most ill-equipped to negotiate with the EU.

As the number one Brexit supporter, they could not and would not have settled for anything less than a 'good deal".

Did I make any asserions as to their competence or otherwise at anything?

Ummmmmmm ???? no I did not.

I simply suggested that if they had remained cohesive post EUref that their *presence* in the polls would have a sobering impact on Westminster right now.

 

[Harrythedog]

If Theresa May stated publically that the UK Government will NOT and would NEVER put a hard border between the two Irelands whether we leave with a deal or a no deal, stating that if a hard border was imposed it would be by the EU and Eire.
Would there be any reason why this would be a bad idea?

A genuine question for those far more knowledable than I

 

[Deleted member 37751]

If Theresa May stated publically that the UK Government will NOT and would NEVER put a hard border between the two Irelands whether we leave with a deal or a no deal, stating that if a hard border was imposed it would be by the EU and Eire.
Would there be any reason why this would be a bad idea?

A genuine question for those far more knowledable than I

The EU are effectively saying that because the U.K. is the one leaving that it is them who should come up with a solution to the “hard border” quandary - the U.K. then say they’re happy to keep the “no border” policy but then the EU say that’s not good enough, if you’re leaving the customs union etc then *you* have to fix this issue.

This then goes round and around ad infinitum!

 

[Dryce]

If Theresa May stated publically that the UK Government will NOT and would NEVER put a hard border between the two Irelands whether we leave with a deal or a no deal, stating that if a hard border was imposed it would be by the EU and Eire.
Would there be any reason why this would be a bad idea?

Only a fool would commit to NEVER. It's tempting fate.

What you would do is make it clear that as things stand you wouldn't need to do it - and leave it to the EU to screw over Ireland by insisting on it.

At the moment with both the UK and EU reasonably in sync then you could operate a soft border. As long as both countries didn't diverge too much on tarriffs, taxes, immigration and CTA, and security then that could be maintained.

Ultimately the UK and Eire have been sorting themselves out. The EU has been useful to both sides to soothe the politics - but IMO it's more of a placebo.

Personally if I was in charge (and thankfully for everybody I'm not in charge) then I'd be looking at the supposed cost of HS2 and figuring the money would be better spent on a bridge to NI. Dangle all that money at some clever engineering people and there would be a practical solution devised. If we were China or Japan then we'd already have something built or being built. And I'd be looking at making a journey from Belfast to London by car or train not much different in terms of time than Glasgow or Edinburgh to London - and ultimately 'Derry to London not much different than Dundee or Perth to London.

 

[Nat]

Just heard that Mrs May will allow the commons to vote on no deal and Brexit extension if her deal is rejected!

I'm struggling to see how she can make more of a mess of this than she already has. She probably will though!

She couldn't. I can't help thinking she has some sort of a mental illness.

That'll be Brexit finished off for good. The next step will be the EU saying she can't extend A50 making things even more interesting.

She'll be remembered for been one of the most incompetent PM's along with Cameron. I look forward to the day she leaves number 10 and even then she'll need dragging out, screaming. kicking and shouting about her "red lines" brexit means brexit" and "no deal is better than bad deal"

If a new brexit party does emerge it might end up with 17.4m voters straight away.

 

[markjay]

...She'll be remembered for been one of the most incompetent PM's along with Cameron...

No doubt David Cameron managed to shoot himself in the foot by promising a referendum before the 2015 elections (in a bid to stop Conservative voters from defecting to UKIP), but I am not sure this will get him remembered as an incompetent PM as such... for Brexiters anyway he will be more of an accidental hero, perhpas?

 

[Yugguy]

Feck me though, Corbyn or May? What a choice. It's a bit like asking which bollock would you like chopped off.

What a shower of shite our Parliament is.

 

[AMGeed]

Feck me though, Corbyn or May? What a choice. It's a bit like asking which bollock would you like chopped off.

What a shower of shite our Parliament is.

Post of the month contender