Westminstenders: Waiting for the vote that never comes

[RedToothBrush]

March 12th (or earlier): Second vote on May deal.
March 13th: Vote on No Deal if WA fails to pass on the 12th
March 14th: Vote on an a50 extension.

The March 14th vote is the most important, though the others are still important and we have no idea how nuclear the ERG or the moderates will ultimately go in terms of blowing the Tory Party apart.

Even if May's Deal does pass we need an extension. We've known this a long time, from a British POV, but the EU have now explicitly said that they will need a technical extension to ratify the WA if we now approve it. We also need an extension if we decide to go for No Deal because we will have legal chaos as the HoC hasn't passed the necessary legislation for No Deal either. But this isn't the EU's problem...

With feelings in the EU becoming more bitter the idea of an extension might be more difficult to come by, if May hasn't passed the WA by the 29th March though.

The EU and May are therefore both aligned with a mutual interest to get the WA passed by 29th March for this reason. Which might mean the EU do play tough on granting us an extension (at least initially) if we formally ask for one on the 14th March in order to help persuade the HoC vote for May's deal before the deadline of the 29th March.

I think we should expect the WA to fail to pass on the 12th March. There just aren't the numbers for it. Then hardball politics from the EU commence on the 14th - it might well be a long extension or nothing. May will then try and do MV3 before the 29th March. If it passes, May's happy and the EU are happy. If it fails... well... I think the EU might give way to a shorter extension at that point, but very begrudgingly. And the idea will be for MV4 or the July cliff edge.

Until then we sit waiting forever for the sun to start going around the earth and for pigs to fall out of the sky.

When Fox said on Marr that the UK/EU trades with most countries (including US) simply on WTO terms, it was incorrect. I'd personally suspect most of what he said was misrepresentation and obfuscation.

There are mutual recognition agreements between the US and the EU. Non tariff barriers are a big hindrance to trade. Technical agreements. They are being negotiated by working groups all the time.

Liam could have a look because if he wasn't deliberately lying, there could be an ignorant man in charge of Trade. And why would an ignorant or mendacious person be appointed to such a position? Or one who had proven themselves to be unequal to their role.

Below is just the one on medicines.

Questions & Answers on the impact of Mutual Recognition Agreement between the European Union and the United States as of 8 February 2019

www.ema.europa.eu/en/documents/other/questions-answers-impact-mutual-recognition-agreement-between-european-union-united-states-8_en.pdf

It was never thought to be enforceable, because she didn't consulted properly with them

• there was almost certainly not even a verbal agreement

As I posted:
This government doesn't care about wasting taxpayers money

Or Grayling wouldn't still be in office after wasting 2.5 bn

if it takes hundreds of millions per vote, or even if it had brought no votes, she doesn't care

Talk to the Swiss and to the Norwegians – they live in a permanent state of negotiation with the EU.
I travel to both countries for work. Those I talk to are not sympathetic to brexit in any form. They think we've simply lost our business acumen (which used to be universally respected, as was our diplomacy). This is I think much worse than it sounds.

Why is Kyle not a good amendment please? Yes it may mean more vote for WA but if that means a PV on the WA and revoke then I honestly believe that is a way forward. I accept that there are other potential ways to leave the EU -Norway etc but when these get examined properly they are never as rosy as they first appear.

Also in the Guardian today an interesting Polly Toynbee article about the fake news / lies that have been gone viral about the Lisbon Treaty.
www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/mar/04/anti-eu-brexit-fake-news

Cailleach Remember Fox said in 2017 that he would have all 40 FTAs rolled over for Brexit Day
So he's not a person to believe

EU trade deals & agreements of different kinds around the world:

See below the colour-coded map for the different kinds of EU agreements around the world
The biggest white gap - respresenting no deal - is with Russia - currently under trade sanctions

The heading "Current state of play" gives details of all these

http://ec.europa.eu/trade/policy/countries-and-regions/negotiations-and-agreements/

There are three main types of agreements:

1.	<span class="italic">Customs Unions</span>
•	eliminate customs duties in bilateral trade
•	establish a joint customs tariff for foreign importers. 

2.	<span class="italic">Association Agreements, Stabilisation Agreements, (Deep and Comprehensive) Free Trade Agreements and Economic Partnership Agreements</span>
•	remove or reduce customs tariffs in bilateral trade.

3.	<span class="italic">Partnership and Cooperation Agreements</span>
•	provide a general framework for bilateral economic relations
•	leave customs tariffs as they are

My Mum was telling me that way back in 1975 at the last ref . Ireland decided at that time if the UK voted yes, they would join and if no they wouldn’t . I am nnot saying at all that the Republic of Irelan£ should leave too just pointing out it seems to me that they saw more than 40 years ago the issue with a common border where inhabitants are Jones more at the hip. I suspect the feeling then in the ROI was partly about unification but also common sense.

This government doesn't care about wasting taxpayers money

It's weird isn't it- sort of like a billionaire who will spend millions on a poorly researched business idea but won't give £100 to charity? Expenditure is ok on Labour votes or ferry less companies if there's a chance of gain for the party political agenda.

Of course, If the billions that had already been spent on Brexit had actually been given to reverse some austerity measures, to the NHS and to education there would have been a greater chance of party political gain.
Until the polls drop more though the current Tories have no reason to see that or to change.

2bees Personally, I'd love to see the Kyle amendment approve, so that we get a PV
on the WA (the only available deal) vs Revoke

However, it would get almost no Tory support, so its chances look poor

www.theguardian.com/business/2019/mar/05/uk-retailers-suffer-weaker-sales-due-to-brexit-uncertainty

I am a victim of this sadly.. I left my last job last summer and since January have been trying to set myself up as a textile artist. I was delighted when a local gallery decided to take me on recently and was preparing stuff for them. They are now closing.

Yet, it is repeated without any correction on Marr. Again and again.

Common sense is good, 2bees. And right now, in a world that has changed a great deal since 1975, common sense dictates that it is best for the ROI to stay in the EU. It really is that simple.

BCF though the TM majority is getting smaller and smaller. Grieve and Ken Clark I would have thought would vote for it others too maybe? I would be happy of. a majority of 1 !

PMK

Ponty pthings I agree with you, the RoI should stay in , just wish we were too.

Those 40 years were transformative for Ireland. Ireland was so dependent on trade with the UK. A very unequal relationship with bad prices and bad terms. I'm not surprised that GB would like to go back.

Ireland, as an English speaking and forward looking country within the EU, with historic ties to other English speaking countries via the diaspora, a young, well educated workforce and flourishing financial, tech and pharma industries, potentially has a great future. A far cry from the impoverished and religion ridden country of the 1970s, still very much reliant on the UK for most of its trade (and exports of young people).

Gareth Davies @ gareth_davies09
Breaking news this morning: Government launches investigation after @BureauLocal finds Peterborough Council may have broken law by selling £23 million worth of public property to plug holes in its finances

Why is this of immediate concern? The council is due to vote on a budget tomorrow that is reliant on raising another £10.6 million from asset sales. If the spending is found to be unlawful it could be disallowed, leaving the council with a gaping hole in its finances

m.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/peterborough-council-finances_uk_5c7d8cc2e4b0129e36bdcb59?utm_hp_ref=uk-homepage
Has Peterborough Council Unlawfully Used Money Raised From Selling Public Spaces?
The government is now investigating, amid concerns £23million may have been used unlawfully.

From the article
Of immediate concern are the council’s plans for the coming financial year which are due to be approved by councillors at a meeting tomorrow. The current proposed budget is reliant on using another £10.6m of money made from selling assets just to break even.

The council acknowledges it has used capital receipts to meet running costs, but argues the way it has done so is legal.

If found to be in breach of the rules, the planned £10.6m spending could be disallowed and the Conservative-led council, which serves a population of around 200,000, would have to find another way of bridging the gap as a matter of urgency.

There are now fears Peterborough could follow the same path as its neighbour Northamptonshire, which last February became the first council in nearly 20 years to ban all but essential expenditure after it effectively ran out of money. A government investigation found Northamptonshire Council had breached regulations by selling off assets to balance its books in the years leading to its financial collapse.

m.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/sold-from-under-you-interactive-map_uk_5c757406e4b0bf166204267b?ugs&utm_hp_ref=uk-homepage
Has Your Local Council Been Selling Off Public Spaces? Find Out Here
Search this interactive map to find out what is happening in your area.

Liam Fox talking shit on Marr is another example of how Brexiters are allowed to say what they like without getting pulled up on it.

Fox, Mogg, Farage etc have all gone on here and made pronouncements on international trade that are utterly erroneous and no one pulls them up. If Dianne Abbott had done the same then she would be derided.

Nov 2018 RoI trade statistics

After 45 years of Common Market / EU / EC membership,

RoI trade value is several times higher with the EU than the UK
So Irexit makes no economic sense

• and 92% of Irish people want to stay in the EU anyway

https://cso.ie/en/releasesandpublications/er/gei/goodsexportsandimportsnovember2018/

RoI exports:
10% to UK
49% to EU

RoI imports:
22% from UK
57% from EU

I WASN’T SUGGESTING IRELAND SHOULD LEAVE !
READ MY POST !

I understood that: I was just backing you up with stats

Peter Foster@pmdfoster

Why a no deal would be a disaster. And why too many Brexiteers still don’t care.

Ben Kellyy@TheScepticIsle*

Support for ‘no deal’ Brexit is the pinnacle of Leave's descent into zealotry.
The end result of refusing to plan

Like Trump, 'no deal' advocates have flooded the debate with “alternative facts”
It won't end well
.....
The increased support for a ‘no deal’ Brexit is the ultimate failure of the Leave movement.
It’s the inevitable consequence of the refusal to grasp details, come to terms with complexity & coalesce around a plan.

Compromise can be frustrating.
So instead they will have a tantrum.

< leads into superb techical thread, with links to several experts, why No Deal / WTO would be a disaster
Excellent references to counter the main Brexiter lies about No Deal >

mobile.twitter.com/TheScepticIsle/status/1102590752717185024