Westminstenders: Break it or make it.

[RedToothBrush]

We have a deal on the table. In reality it does not answer the question the result of the referendum posed: what type of deal do we want? The progress we have actually made in 2 years is to say, 'we want to leave' but nothing more. Or as its been termed: 'Blind Brexit' in which we exit but without knowing what comes next.

Even this is controversial. There are apparently some 88 Conservative back bench MPs (or half the Conservative back bench MPs) who are intending to vote against approving the deal. Some are remainers and some are hard leavers. Each side believing there is still everything to play for; whether that be no deal or no brexit. We are still as divided as ever.

The stumbling block, as ever, is largely the NI backstop. With many still arguing that it should be time limited. This fails to understand that the backstop is the GFA to all intents and purposes. And this is why Ireland and the EU will never agree to have a time limited backstop.

And once again we have this fundamental misunderstanding that the withdrawal agreement is anything more than merely the mechanism to leave, not the final deal, which is hampering all discussion of the subject.

There is talk that May will try to push the deal through and if she fails she will try for a second time. This might work, if this wasn't being anticipated. The trouble is the element of surprise is gone. This has now been denied by a No10 spokesperson. And has the possibility of a second referendum. Though the door on that, seems to be more open than less, with May's official declaration of a Blind Brexit. The whole effectiveness of a TARP style situation and a second vote on the deal in the HoC is the guilotine effect, where MPs look over the cliff and go 'shiiiiiitttt'. If the hope is alive for another way out for either the ERG or Remainers, then the plan is dead anyway. The a50 ECJ case is also still on; the latest government appeal to kill it was blocked.

Not only this, but there is the first tangable rumblings of discontent within the EU towards the deal. Spain has talked about voting the deal down. Whether this is anymore than talk, remains to be seen. Spain can not veto the deal at this stage anyway - but it might be able to cause trouble further down the line and thats the danger.

Meanwhile Labour are still promising unicorns and a total renegotition of the deal. This still focuses on the backstop.

Sunday's EU summit does still seem to be on though, despite Merkel suggesting that she wouldn't turn up.

And remember, as it stands, on 29th March we will leave the EU without a deal. The power to stop this lies with the Government and EU as far as we know at present, pending the outcome of the ECJ case.

May still has everything to do to make a deal happen and there are so many forces and people working to break it. We have still not made any real progress to Brexit, apart from get closer to it, through the mere ticking of the clock.

Mumsnet getting spammed left, right & centre today!

I am pretty sure that if Labour had any credible plans early on then the EU negotiators would have leaned on 'Our Theresa' to at least make it a 3 way discussion

Theresa May made it very clear to the entire world that she - and she alone - was handling this. Hence the total lack of any empathy or sympathy on my part. For her to have to grovel like a simpering schoolgirl to try and grub a few labour MP votes now is entirely appropriate with her hubristic stance from the off.

.

m.youtube.com/watch?feature=youtu.be&v=-JajY37UalI

I don’t know if anyone has seen this. It’s harrowing but a stark reminder of what utter cunts Camoron and Osborne were/are

I am pretty sure that if Labour had any credible plans early on then the EU negotiators would have leaned on 'Our Theresa' to at least make it a 3 way discussion

TM made it clear there would be no other involvement in Brexit talks other than the government (her)
Even if that could have been the case, Labour had no red lines, she had "no SM, no CU, no ECJ and end to FOM"

WTF was there to negotiate on?

So, of course its fairly obviously Labour would have got a different deal, its conjecture as to whether it would have been "better"

BCF of course remainer MP's oppose deal because of the slim chance of no brexit.
Some brexitiers seem to be (very relectantly) happier with the option of no brexit too, as they can, at least, leave the EU, their argument with her deal is Eu could lock us in..forever! rather ironic really!

In hindsight (I know) Cameron should have insisted on a series of tests (a la Gordon Browns Euro entry tests) that had to be met before any referendum.

I say that, because cancelling Brexit this time (if it were to happen) needs to be done with a clear view as to how to proceed, and what it needs for there to be any future attempt to leave.

Labour's 6 tests were designed to be impossible:

Corbyn keeps saying the referendum must be respected - and Brexit must happen, without a PV - and then sets 6 conditions that only Remain could fulfill

He always wanted to use Brexit to get elected, because without Brexit he'd have no chance

And the PLP just put up with his opportunism and scheming

Good summary from the MN Webchat:

What are the three redeeming qualities of Theresa May’s deal? What are the three damning qualities of the deal she has struck?

Good:

1. Largely protects the rights of EU citizens in the UK and Brits in the EU (although not entirely.
2. Transition period until December 2020 means very little changes when we actually Brexit in March.
3. The customs backstop means the risk of a hard border in Ireland is largely averted

Bad:

1. We know almost nothing about the future trading relationship between the UK and EU after the transition period - the Political Declaration is non-binding and very vague.
2. The customs backstop - which could be in place indefinitely or at least for years - means we still follow EU rules on tariffs etc but without a vote or voice - so less control than now.
3. Any future trade deal has to be approved unanimously by the EU27 countries - meaning that it could be held hostage by the French over fish, the Spanish over Gibraltar, etc. Our bargaining position was very weak in this round of negotiations - in future it's going to be even weaker.

btw: Of the bad, I don't care about 2)
and worst case is that 1) and 3) postpone the immediate disaster after 29 March

Best case is that we negotiate Norway++ in transition, either via this unaltered WA,
or - better option - by Parliament insisting that the PD be amended to make Norway++ the aim of both parties

ElenadeClermont absolutely YY to BoJo hanging his head in shame.

But I thought it interesting how Hedges was constantly described as "not spying for the uk" and most of his friends & fellow academics from Durham who supported him publicly appeared to be American... .

DGRossetti so agree about DC setting out tests. It was complacent and irresponsible of him not to do so. Similarly, TM should not have triggered A50 without a plan. But on the subject of hindsight, I think people forget the level of vitriol emanating from the swivel-eyed at the time. It has taken a good two years before MPs felt able to mention a second referendum for example and the dire potential consequences of leaving without a deal can be openly discussed.

Finally, reading about Grenfell Tower and how medical implants have been insufficiently studied and monitored recently, it astounds me how certain members of the right are still banging on about wanting less regulation.

I was happy to get the confirmation that revoking A50 before 29th march would indeed lead to NO adverse change at all for the UK. I've come across the assumption that things would irreversibly change very often but that needs to be challenged. The plug CAN be pulled if the court rules of course that the UK can do so unilaterally. We are not yet past the point of no return.

Norway++ still requires a border between the UK and the EU - just as there is between Norway and Sweden. Even with ANPR, video surveillance, pre-approval of trusted traders etc. it can still take a truck over an hour to cross the Nor/Swe border - which would be unacceptable on the island of Ireland and would cause a huge bottleneck at Dover and the other ports.

Finally, reading about Grenfell Tower and how medical implants have been insufficiently studied and monitored recently

Just what DW needs after being told to "fuck off home" for the first time (it's that foreign name) ... learn that the pump she has implanted might be a knock-off. Who said getting older is boring ?

We are not yet past the point of no return.

From the EU’s point of view magnanimously taking the U.K. back would be great PR.

However difficult to understand how or why they would do that if roughly 50% of the electorate still want to leave.

QuietRebel Revoking

I understood that retaining all optouts and current benefits was only certain if the ECJ rule revocation can be unilateral

Iirc one lawyer said if it could only be agreed unanimously, or even by QMV,
then a country that changed its mind could be "blackmailed" by other countries demanding concessions to agree to this

Also, in either case, would we have to repay all the expenses of the E27 and EU Commission - several billions ! ?
That's independent of optouts, just paying for damage caused

We need to wait until the ECJ rule:

1. whether it can be unilateral
2. if requiring the consent of other members, then can they set conditions including removing optouts
3. In either case, must the UK pay compensation for expenses caused to other members

The ECJ might even sidestep chicken out and say they reserve judgement until / unless the UK actually requests revocation and the EU or a member country either objects ot sets conditions.

btw, they probably don't think much of Lord Kerr's drafting either.
One judge iirc referring to a "textual void" re revocation.

The problem is that the UK would only rejoin grudgingly, certainly at political level. Scientists and manufacturers would probably be delighted but there is still a massive 'bone head' contingent who would be forever carping and finding fault.
Many in Parliament have the same isolationist (by refusing to share sovereignty) attitudes of N Korea which if the UK were the size of say Europe, may not be an issue as it would have sufficient resources at it's disposal. The UK is far too small to have this sort of aspirations.
The EU want the UK to be an 'equal' partner hopefully at the top table but the UK political mentality says no.

Merry The EU Commission especially and some prominent member govts like France & Germany,
are very concerned the UK might be more disruptive than ever, both from having to pacify a pissed of 50% of voters,

plus needing scapegoats for the damage already caused to the UK:
lost agencies, lost businesses, contracts & jobs, higher prices, cost of DexEU a6 prepping etc

Especially if there is a bill of some billions compensation to the EU for all their expenses prepping etc

The hope would be that this whole sorry affair could still be a wakeup call if we Remain,
say if the decision is at the last moment, after businesses have already sent out redundancy notices, Sterling plummetted again, panic ...

but I expect most Leavers would continue blaming "Remainiac traitors & saboteurs", including May, the civil service, the PV marchers .. and people like Westministenders !

We've seen on another ongoing thread that even MN has many fervent No Dealers who BeLeave that is the bestest & purest Brexit.

The problem is that the UK would only rejoin grudgingly, certainly at political level.

Furthermore, the people who voted Leave because (for whatever reason) they didn't feel any benefit from EU membership would now have what they feel as a valid beef against those (scientists, manufacturers) who they see as getting the benefits.

It needs a 'try before you buy' period, say a month or two of total 'Leave' mayhem. Of course some would die, and many hardcore 'Leavers' would just say it was a setup job.

Since some manufacturing (cars particularly) has a surfeit of capacity in Europe maybe Brexit is an idea situation to solve this (from a European perspective): shut all UK manufacturing and repatriate machinery as deemed necessary. Harsh, yes, but who started it?

www.water-purifier.co.za/
I lived and worked in Africa for many years and sometimes the only source of water was very heavily polluted. Think dead animals, faecal matter etc.
We made it safe to drink by filtering it twice through very big, heavy duty water filters (the ones in the link I can find are not the same but the closest I can find) and were nothing like the domestic ones generally used in the U.K.
The water was then boiled, on a wood burning stove, for 30 minutes, cooled, bottled and kept in a fridge, which was powered by paraffin as electricity supplies were often erratic or non existent.
This made it safe for even babies to drink (none of my children ever suffered ill effects from it) but was a very labour intensive process and to produce enough water for a family the filters had to be running constantly.
Water purification tablets were not strong enough to decontaminate the water.

No-deal Brexit: No more warehouses to stockpile food because Amazon may have booked them up, MPs told

The Food and Drink Federation warned that all available frozen and chilled space had been taken – but no-one knew who had taken it and whether there was anything in it.

“What we don’t know is whether there is actual product in those places,” said Ian Wright, the federation’s chief executive.
…

Mr Wright said the federation remained opposed to ending free movement of labour – a criticism he had put to Ms May in person at a meeting this week.

And, on the “political declaration”, which was meant to outline a future trade deal, he added: “It’s a list of New Year resolutions – and we don’t know whether they will still be there at the end of January.”

Both Mr Wright and Ian Rayson, of Nestle, cast doubt on a solution ever being found to deliver frictionless trade, while avoiding the return of a hard border in Ireland.

“We’re not aware of technologies that can magically solve the problem,” Mr Rayson told the committee.

And Mr Wright said: “When politicians tell you there’ll be a technological solution [for Ireland] they almost certainly don’t know what they’re talking about.”

www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/no-deal-brexit-latest-crisis-amazon-stockpile-food-warehouses-booked-a8654006.html

on a wood burning stove

As noted upthread, you need energy to purify water - which costs.