Is Jeremy Corbyn right to insist on ruling out no deal before engaging?

[lazylittlelucy]

I am not a fan of JC and think he has repeatedly fucked up on Brexit but I also think it is IMPERATIVE that we avoid no deal.
Is he right to dig his heels in on this issue or is it just another example of his intransigence?
I'm inclined to think he is right, but are there good reasons why it should not be ruled out?

@Badbadbunny absolutely. No deal it's a bargaining tool.

He meets with the IRA and Hammas, but won’t even meet with the PM to try and navigate a path through the biggest national crisis in living memory?

Fuck that, fuck him. The Labour Party have done nothing to improve the situation and offered no solutions. The no confidence vote was a massive waste of time and a distraction.

I’m mystified as to why everyone thinks there’s a better deal on offer? It’s in the interests of the EU for this to be as punitive as possible to put everyone else off.

Of course it's outrageous.

It completely ties May's hands with the EU. If No Deal is completely off the table then they know we've got to agree to something. They are then less likely to be willing to negotiate further.

No Deal is in no-one's interests, least of all the other EU countries and indeed the institution itself. They won't be getting their 39 billion for starters, one of their largest net contributors is walking away, with whom they have huge trading deficit - some 60 billion.

For her to have the strongest possibly negotiating position then the very real threat of No Deal has to remain on the table. Without it we are left only two options - a shit deal or no Brexit.

Corbyn is a Brexiteer. Anyone who sees him as the champion of Remainers is deluding themselves. It just suits him politically not to show his true colours.

A no deal Brexit will harm the EU just as much, if not more, than the UK,

That sounds suspiciously like "They need us more than we need them". It's complete bollocks.

They're not risking food and medicine shortages, massive factory closures and civil unrest are they? They're not putting blockages in both the export route to their largest markets and the import route to their largest suppliers. They're not giving up FTAs all over the world.

Make no mistake, the EU doesn't need us at all. It's true they'd be ridiculous to not want the smoothest trade possible with the 5th largest economy in the world, right on their doorstep, just as we'd be ridiculous not to want the closest possible relationship with the world's largest and richest trading bloc, right on our doorstep. The EU has many countries to trade with apart from us though, and their trade with those countries doesn't rely on us being in the EU. Our trade with the rest of the world is facilitated by us being in the EU though.

The only legal/possible way for no deal to be taken away is either a) to agree a deal, or b) reverse article 50. He knows this, and wants neither.
He is hoping that by using this as an excuse to avoid talks, the government will be forced into no deal, the uk will struggle for the 1st few years after a no deal brexit, so when the next GE comes about, his party will win and he can blame the mess (and his future fuck ups) on the tories.
He has been an odious, self serving, shit stirring knob throughout his entire political career, it is fantasy to suggest he will start putting his partys/countrys interests first now.

No deal it's a bargaining tool.

If you're a dick who believes in an adversarial approach rather than approaching negotiations in good faith and trying to reach a consensus that's successful for all.

How's that going so far?

Well, May has insisted that she will not move on her red lines, no to SM CU, FOM.
doesn't appear to be much to talk about, to me its just another example of "playing to gallery" making it look as if our Parliamentarians are all working hard.

As to no -deal will harm the EU as much or more than the UK, please do some research first, esp if there is a second vote!

They can’t twke it off the table because it’s a legal part of article 50 that if we don’t do a deal we have to leave without a deal

This is the case isn't it? The way to avoid no deal is to agree a deal, so he should engage with the process of finding a solution. I'm pissed off with all of them, but he's on another level. I think he's actually a very bad person.

Why can’t he just go off on the sick. I’m sure he could find some doc to give him a sick line. And then someone else can step up, see us though non brexit (article 50 being revoked)

Then he comes back and gets to be opposition leader when he can fight for things he cares about.

Oh I can dream.

No deal is just default if parliament cannot agree.
You cannot take it off the table unless you have an alternative deal. Which we currently don’t.

Ofcourse he shouldn't talk while TM insists on holding a pistol to parliaments head. If she were a responsible leader that had the best interests of the country at heart she would immediately take no deal off the table....but she won't because it's a 'bargaining chip' like threatening to blow your face off will somehow bluff the EU into capitulation. She only wants Corbyn's fingerprints on the trigger, and has already ruled out A50 extension, a customs union and taking no deal off, pretending she is listening when she is only trying to convince Mps that her deal isn't really that shit.
She invoked A50, she set the red lines, she messed up the negotiation, it was her flagship policy and because it's failed, she wants to make Corbyn guilty by association which the right wing press can use to give us more of this strong and stable bullshit, with loose associations with the IRA, Hamas etc. Own your shit Theresa and when you stop holding us all to ransom and are prepared to listen, then Corbyn will talk.

If he can sit down with Gerry Adams and Hamas terrorists (sorry, freedom fighters), he can sit down with Theresa May to discuss this national emergency.

The rest of the EU have better things to worry about than the UK and our exit plans.

We are not so important to them and they will manage fine without us.

Unfortunately we will suffer, at least in the short term.

I agree with Jezza.

Putting No Deal as an option is economic suicide for the UK. The EU will also get hurt but it's spread across 27 member states.

GoFiguire

Corbyn is so self interested. Party or die. You aren't old Labour, you're the enemy.

He's a twat. Wants to be pm for Brexit so he can establish his interpretation of a Marxist state.

Makes my blood run cold.

The rest of the EU have better things to worry about than the UK and our exit plans.

Do they? What?

They like to pretend they don't, but Brexit will be hard for them too. It will be a disaster for us, and it will hit us a lot harder than them, but they don't have reasons to be cheerful either.

Agree Corbyn is a disaster

He is living in a dream world if he can think ge can get a great deal. Brussels will not allow it. It's really that simple.

How does he think he'll get a great deal? What suggestions has he made?

He's awful.

Own your shit Theresa

All very well and good.

When is he going to own his shit? All this 'I was there but I didn't participate' crap for starters and telling Labour MPs who they can and can't talk to in government is childish and never going to work.

That's just rubbish craicgalore and the right wing press trying to set a smokescreen for TM's obvious failure. Thatcher negotiated with the IRA, Pinochet and apartheid leaders...but the press never reported these but 25 years after they now dig up some old footage of Corbyn shaking hands at someone's funeral...to deflect from TM's abject failure.

{No deal will unconditionally hurt uk much more than the EU.

Yes they do export more to us, however that is spread across 27 countries - the largest single impact being on Germany with ~6% of their trade being impacted - compared to our 40%}
And worse, the EU are not losing all their trade deals with another 60 countries. All of which will need renegotiating with a population of 60 Million against 500 Million. The EU can 'fight' the USA and China on trade, the UK will just be told to sign on the dotted line.

The threat of no deal is pretty much the only bargaining tool May has with MPs. She's not going to give that away at this point.

There is an ocean of difference between a government trying to negotiate a peace and some backbencher having cosy chats with terrorists. What did he achieve? He had no power or influence when he was doing that. He wasn't trying to broker peace because he had no power to do that. Did he even speak to his mates in Iran about Nazaneen Zadari-Ratcliffe? He was sympathising with terrorists and telling them how much he supported their cause and now he has found himself as a puppet for the hard left of his party he doesn't have a clue.

The rest of the EU have better things to worry about than the UK and our exit plans.

That may be true in terms of economic impact to the individual member states, though they will certainly still feel it. The EU as an institution will suffer from the loss of it's 2nd largest member economically, 3rd largest net financial contributor and a major international political force.