To wonder how people think a new Prime Minister is going to be able to deliver Brexit

[Bearbehind]

I’m no fan of Theresa May; the reason we are in the mess we currently are is because of her red lines and the fact she has never been honest about what was and was not achievable.

But what do people think a new PM can achieve?

No deal will seriously damage the country, even the government’s own impact assessments have concluded that and there’s simply not the numbers in parliament for no cal to happen (even though it’s the default position)

The EU aren’t suddenly going to remove the backstop for a new PM because we’ve proven we cannot be trusted to do what we say so it’s needed.

The irony is not lost on us. The UK literally were literally instrumental in drafting EU single market / customs union rules & legislation.

The WA was the UK's own proposal that the EU agreed to in order to move things forward. Some EU countries were even reluctant to go that far

You realise that "The Deal" was not drawn up solely by TM right? "The Deal/WA" was a result of lengthy discussions between TM, her advisors and The EU. A Deal that the MP's refused to agree to the first time round. Hence TM having to keep going to Brussels to further negotiate. Each time Brussels upped the ante.

We are in this position because the EU became too greedy, TM became desperate to leave with a deal, rather than no deal, her back benchers worked against her because the deal on offer was not good for the UK....
and then Citizen Corbyn stuck his two pennorth worth in, telling his Muppets not to agree to any deal proposed by TM. Desperate for PM much! Not a chance!!

We are in this position because the EU became too greedy

Please could you explain this comment.

From what I can see we were the greedy ones and the EU have never changed their stance from what was practically possible given TMs red lines.

It’s this deluded view of the situation that is causing the problem here - Leavers are refusing to accept reality.

Fanny, the whole point of the EU is that a group of countries grouped together to be able to have superior negotiating leverage and work in the interests of member states. Why would they allow a new deal that wouldn't work for them or that would undermine the unity of the EU and the benefits of membership?

Boris will give you no deal, that's how it will be delivered.

Boris will give you no deal, that's how it will be delivered.

He really won’t - did you see his face the day after Leave won?

He doesn’t actually believe Leaving is the right thing to do, let alone leaving without a deal.

He’s only looking out for himself and there’s no way he’s going to put his neck on the line and be the PM who destroyed the country by persuing no deal in the end.

You realise that "The Deal" was not drawn up solely by TM right? "The Deal/WA" was a result of lengthy discussions between TM, her advisors and The EU. A Deal that the MP's refused to agree to the first time round. Hence TM having to keep going to Brussels to further negotiate. Each time Brussels upped the ante.

The WA has stayed the same throughout and nobody has upped the ante. The biggest criticism of May is that she kept bringing the same WA back to Parliament.

The EU has always kept asking the UK to agree to the same three basic points in the WA;

1. The rights of EU citizens in the UK (which has been largely resolved)
2. The payment of outstanding commitments (again, largely agreed)
3. A solution for the island of Ireland that does not breach the GFA (I.e. the Backstop, which the DUP and the ERG and Hard Brexiters refuse to consider)

TheGardenFairy - perhaps you could also explain how you believe the next PM, whoever it is, should approach the EU. As above:

1. It has to be a deal that the UK Parliament will accept, and
2. It has to be a deal that has a realistic chance of the EU accepting.

Bearbehind. Nobody could explain this mess in a paragraph. Go and do some research. I'm not a leaver BTW.

You think BJ won't take us out with no deal? 😂😂😂

@TheGardenFairy - We are in this position because the EU became too greedy

What exactly have the EU looked for that is so greedy? The UK wanted a deal that was superior to membership. The EU are not willing to give the UK that because they are not idiots. The EU are standing behind Ireland in their expectation that the UK will comply with an international peace treaty that they signed. The UK forgot about the GFA when coming up with their pipe dream of a deal because generally, Britain doesn't give a crap about NI.

Havana How the next apt takes us out of the EU is not my decision. Neither is it yours. I don't have a crystal ball. Do you?

But the next Tory Leader will be a brexiteer. Good Luck to them is all I can say. They will either have to suffer what TM has suffered or say "Fuck it! We are out. It has been proved we cannot negotiate with the EU. No Deal it is"

Actually @isthisafreename has come up with the most succinct and accurate summing up of the situation I’ve seen. It would be very instructive to anyone in any doubt.

He really won’t - did you see his face the day after Leave won?
Umm but BJ was as Arch Brexiteer

Havana How the next apt takes us out of the EU is not my decision. Neither is it yours. I don't have a crystal ball. Do you?

No, no crystal ball. But since the title of the thread is: AIBU To wonder how people think a new Prime Minister is going to be able to deliver Brexit it might be interesting to hear how you (and others) think Brexit might be resolved. Other than revoking Art 50, there seems to be no other way of squaring the circle.

edwinbear I'd be banned if I said what I thought about your comment.

I've never wished anything bad to happen with Brexit so I could say 'see, ha, we told you!' but I would honestly make an exception for you.

Please, explain your comment if you're being fucking serious.

{The EU went into negotiations with the aim of forcing us back in by offering a bad deal}

The WA is NOT a deal at all. It is the legal process for disentangling 40+ years of tight integration of the UK into the EU.
It is the basic ground rules from which the UK has the possibility of saying it wants to leave this particular 'regulation, in which case the WA is the legal text to achieve that, or it may be the UK wants to keep some elements (CU/SM or whatever) which feature in Mr Barnier's 'steps' diagram as previously agreed between Norway/ Canada etc.
The PD which can and will be renegotiated would specify which aspects are retained or lost, and when they would come into force.
The EU is a 'rules based' entity. All the rules are available to view by any citizen so the implications are not secret. One issue is that the Chequers meeting produced a document where about 10 of the 12 'requirements' directly contradict the rules of the EU (which we are a member). It was referred to as 'cake', and there will be no cake, the UK is leaving (unless it doesn't). As PP have said, if the UK leaves EVERY aspect/deal that the UK has with the EU will be worse than members get, whether it is a 1% tariff for some goods or whatever, it will never be as good as the other 27 members share between themselves.
The UK is not a shy retiring wallflower that has to be handled with care, it has been and in many respects still is a bully that has murdered and stolen from countries around the world so will not be spared much just because it has wet itself having decided to pick a fight with the EU. The UK will also find it very tough negotiating with the USA/Russia/China etc, as Liam Fox is discovering. The 'best' be has come up with is continued supply of coffee beans from Columbia.

Umm but BJ was as Arch Brexiteer

FFS dana, do you really just take everything at face value?

BJ had always been an advocate of the EU but he saw siding with Leave as an opportunity to become the hero who just missed out, thus enhancing his career.

Except leave went and won and his plan was screwed.

I genuinely cannot understand why this isn’t as clear as day to people.

Johnson has form for making things up and for saying one thing one day and then the opposite the day after. Here's a little clip of him explaining his views on Turkey joining the EU and on Muslims in Britain.

What a difference the prospect of becoming PM can make.

Parliament is remain, majority
UK public voted leave

I don't usually join Brexit threads, but this ^^ is precisely why we were never going to leave and won't now ... there's just too much political self interest involved in us staying (though no doubt the many 1000s of non-jobs the "negotiations" spew out are appreciated)

The referendum promise was merely a political tool for Cameron, which all went a bit wrong with the unexpected result. Nevertheless the arguments over what % voted for whatever are neither here nor there - it wouldn't have mattered if every single voter backed leave because, despite the endless delaying tactics, there's no real political will for it to happen

I genuinely cannot understand why this isn’t as clear as day to people.

OP, I'm with you. But the reason is more or less that despite everything - most people don't engage with critical thinking/analysis. I can't blame them what with all the shit life throws at everyone. But that's pretty much the long and short of it. A lot of people have become attuned to BJ as a hapless but happy clown of sorts. A lot of these same people also feel sorry for TM for crying as she was announcing her departure. I'll save my tears for those that died as a result of the hostile environment she created and indeed those that decided suicide was a better option than facing another round of cuts/sanctions/trepidation to their disability, or other, benefits.

BJ had always been an advocate of the EU but he saw siding with Leave as an opportunity to become the hero who just missed out, thus enhancing his career

Exactly, Bearbehind ... you'd think this would be obvious, but apparently not

Like practically every other politician he's just putting his own interests first

Boris could not just take us out with no deal in the face of a Parliament in which there is majority against it. Parliament (not the executive) is Sovereign. This is what taking back control looks like.....

Ooh! Reason #5 Y new PM will help. David Davis, WorldatOne 24.5.19.

"Because we don't really need to control our borders." He's also in there saying that a trade deal can be negotiated instead of a WA. Yup, DDavis saying this in 2019, folks. This might be put under 'flexible' reason #1, instead, I suppose.

What strikes me is none of the new-PM-will-fix-Brexshit proponents (I hear) talks about cross-party cooperation. It's like they have forgotten how to count. Has Rory Stewart talked about X-party unity?

Umm but BJ was as Arch Brexiteer

He wrote two versions of the newspaper column. The one he published where he announced his decision to back leave, and a second one where he supported Cameron and backed remain (the Evening Standard published this version in Oct 2016 - google it).

He backed leave because he thought that would be the best option for his career. He never expected leave to win, which is why he looks so devastated in the footage from the day after the referendum. He was banking on a narrow remain win, but with continued leave sniping destabilising DC so that he could challenge him for the leadership and become PM. No doubt with a narrative around standing up for the minority who wanted to leave whilst respecting the result of the referendum.

{"Because we don't really need to control our borders." He's also in there saying that a trade deal can be negotiated instead of a WA. Yup, DDavis saying this in 2019, folks. This might be put under 'flexible' reason #1, instead, I suppose.}

For a 'random' on the internet to say this is one thing and is obviously incorrect. For D Davies to say this as a Brexit negotiator is bordering on criminal.