Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Flexible and made to last.

Meet the Other Phone.
Flexible and made to last.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
Brexit
Original poster

A bill has been passed to prevent no deal brexit

207 replies

StealthPolarBear · 09/04/2019 11:14

I would have thought would have been the lead story on the bbc news, and in fact would have popped up on breaking news. I can't find it anywhere on there. In fact they're still reporting no deal will happen on Friday in the absence of anything else.
I am so confused, can anyone explain this to me?

OP posts:
Original poster
StealthPolarBear · 09/04/2019 14:52

Will there minds be focused now? They have had three years.

OP posts:
FishesaPlenty · 09/04/2019 15:03

Well they've woken up to the threat of no deal, they're cooperating a bit and they're making the right sort of noises, so I think their minds are probably as focused as they're going to be.

Original poster
StealthPolarBear · 09/04/2019 15:06

Their minds
Brexit is responsible for the decline of my once perfect grammar

OP posts:
namechangetohidemyshame · 09/04/2019 15:19

Is it possible the EU could get sick of us after three years of all this and just boot us out?

It's not the EU booting us out though - we triggered article 50 and that kicks us out by automatic operation of law.

We didn't have to trigger article 50. We did that, and we then automatically leave the EU with no deal unless we agree a deal, or we agree an extension. We agreed an extension two weeks ago which takes us up to this Friday, and now either we agree another extension, or we finally go for Theresa May's deal, or ... we crash out. But we did that, not the EU. I hope that makes sense?

The language used by the papers makes it very confusing I must say, oftentimes if you read the headlines you'd think that all this was caused by the rest of the EU and they're stopping us doing things/forcing us to do things. In fact we're behaving like a petulant child and the EU is doing its best to stop us harming ourselves (and the island of Ireland in the process).

DGRossetti · 09/04/2019 15:23

Is it possible the EU could get sick of us after three years of all this and just boot us out?

There is no mechanism for the EU to expel a member state.

Original poster
StealthPolarBear · 09/04/2019 15:29

The EU clearly wants us to stay and I think they're being very patient and fair. Think of all the money they're wasting on this.

OP posts:
Bluntness100 · 09/04/2019 15:31

It's a bill to prevent no deal so the prime minister needs to seek an extension. The Eu will give us one, they will do everything in their power to prevent us crashing out with no deal, and macron would rather eat his own liver than be the man who forced the U.K. out with no deal and caused damage to so many economies. He is also just one voice, and although he plays hardball, as he did the last time we asked for an extension, he is a conciliatory politician and will go with the majority and what is best for eu. And what is best is us not crashing out.

The question on the table is not will they grant an extension, the question on the table is how long an extension they wish us to take.

The media has a lot to answer for, as well as some ludicrous self serving politicians, I've been posting for several weeks that no deal was off the table. It has been off the table from the moment it became clear the house was against it. Everything else was just smoke, mirrors and a lot of self poniticating or part of the negotiations.

Even the prime minister went into the lobby and voted against it when it was put to the house.

BlackAmericanoNoSugar · 09/04/2019 15:35

Yet again Brexit makes it onto The Poke.www.thepoke.co.uk/2019/04/09/daily-mail-readers-calling-queen-traitor-todays-best-brexit-thing/?fbclid=IwAR2eR2AmRK3lJkpMrOmlncCWxRRZjBkNLzHf4SBy3wQjPgEGxGTjqvSV590 Someone in the comments of the Daily Mail called the Queen a traitor. Grin Is that even possible, to be a traitor to oneself?

noblegiraffe · 09/04/2019 15:36

Voting against it makes no difference to whether it happens or not. It happens automatically. The only things Parliament can do to stop it are agree the WA (possibly too late now) or revoke.

The EU can also stop it by giving an extension.

doIreallyneedto · 09/04/2019 15:39

@Bluntness - I've been posting for several weeks that no deal was off the table. It has been off the table from the moment it became clear the house was against it. Everything else was just smoke, mirrors and a lot of self poniticating or part of the negotiations.

I'm afraid I don't agree with you there. I do agree the EU will do whatever they can to avoid a no deal situation. They will grant an extension. However, to avoid a no deal the parliament have to actually do something. The level of incompetence that has been evident to date does not inspire me to believe they will actually do something in time to avoid a no deal situation.

If the UK do not hold european elections, then remaining in the EU after the 1st of July would be very problematic. Yes, there are fudges possible, but again, that would require a decision by the parliament.

I really hope no deal won't happen but I still think it could happen by stealth.

Original poster
StealthPolarBear · 09/04/2019 15:41

Does anyone know why the bbc have barely reported this development

OP posts:
Bluntness100 · 09/04/2019 15:41

Of course passing a bill forcing a request for an extension makes a difference, when that extension is guaranteed. The only question is how long the eu wishes it for. Every person in that house votIng knew it.

Original poster
StealthPolarBear · 09/04/2019 15:41

As I say I got "horse wins grand national" as sodding breaking news

OP posts:
DGRossetti · 09/04/2019 15:41

Someone in the comments of the Daily Mail called the Queen a traitor

So, what they gonna do about it ???

TalkinPaece · 09/04/2019 15:42

The Brexiters wanted to take back control.

The wanted the UK parliament to be able to make laws
and then did not like it when they did

They wanted the Queen to have final say on legislation
and then did not like it when she did

I would LOVE to be a fly on the wall when TM has her next weekly audience with Brenda.
Do you think they'll bring Philip back out of retirement for the bants Grin

Bluntness100 · 09/04/2019 15:42

If the UK do not hold european elections, then remaining in the EU after the 1st of July would be very problematic

We are holding them. The letter she sent the eu last week stated we would hold them.

Dapplegrey · 09/04/2019 15:43

‘But I suspect Charles III (should he chose that as his regnal name ...) is going to be seeing some major changes in the relationship of the Monarch, the Crown, Parliament and the people.’

Such as?

DGRossetti · 09/04/2019 15:44

Does anyone know why the bbc have barely reported this development

Personally, I think the BBC have been so pro-Brexit it hurts, so it's hardly surprising anything negative gets delayed until they can find a way to polish it up.

The fact that Brexiteers claim the exact opposite could mean it's achieving a neutral stance, but since Brexiteer seems to be shorthand for "whinging minnie", I remain sceptical.

woman19 · 09/04/2019 15:46

The EU clearly wants us to stay

The EU needs to protect the 4 Freedoms.(goods, services, capital and persons)

We don't.

The EU needs to protect itself and stop wasting their own time, energy and £bns on our 'no deal' mess.

As it stands we are out.

With or without a deal.

Bluntness100 · 09/04/2019 15:48

Personally I never watch the bbc news on this. I also agree they are biased, their reporting is very misleading and I can only assume they are either incapable or biased, and as such, I'm saying biased.

As is the daily mail, who deliberately misrepresent the facts.

DGRossetti · 09/04/2019 15:55

Personally I never watch the bbc news on this.

Haven't watched it for years anyway. I gave up late 2017 after a particularly nasty interview between John "where's my Brexit ?" Humphries and Tony Blair. It was basically 5 minutes of JH forensically insisting Blair back up every word he said. He then turned to Farage and let him wibble on for 3 minutes without any interruption - except a couple of times to get Farage to repeat key soundbites.

I know I didn't imagine it, as it was discussed on MN at the time.

I also agree they are biased, their reporting is very misleading and I can only assume they are either incapable or biased, and as such, I'm saying biased.

In this case, I don't thing Hanlons razor counts ...

As is the daily mail, who deliberately misrepresent the facts

TBH I don't count the Mail, Express, Sun, Mirror or Star newspapers. They're really political pamphlets that interpret current affairs according to the views of their readership. As do the Telegraph, Guardian and Times. If you want proper analysis, you need to aggregate your own sites - ideally some non UK ones for balance.

noblegiraffe · 09/04/2019 16:02

I wonder if it hasn’t been reported because it’s basically irrelevant? It says TM has to ask for an extension, but she already has.

DGRossetti · 09/04/2019 16:04

I wonder if it hasn’t been reported because it’s basically irrelevant? It says TM has to ask for an extension, but she already has.

It hasn't been reported because they can't find enough Brexiteers to fill the news item yet. Which surprises me, given how many schools are out.

Bluntness100 · 09/04/2019 16:23

Tm did ask for an extension, and I suspect she would have done so, even if it had not passed in the house by the time she did.

But it had been voted and approved by the House of Commons before she did ask for the extension. It only had to go through the lords next, who are notoriously anti no deal and then get the queens approval. Which was also a given, as she does not interfere in political matters to the extent that would be required for her to reject it.

So it was all but the law when she requested rhe extension. It was far far from irrelevant

It's huge news. Parliament took control and forced the prime minister to be subservient to them. It's nothing short of extraordinary. But don't get the time line wrong. When the House of Commons approved this bill, the prime minister at that stage had not requested an extension. She did it a day or two afterwards. Because the next two stages, the House of Lords, and the Queen, was a given.

DGRossetti · 09/04/2019 16:28

It's huge news. Parliament took control and forced the prime minister to be subservient to them. It's nothing short of extraordinary.

Truly without precedent.

Swipe left for the next trending thread