No Deal Brexit - Bring it on

[Bearbehind]

It’s economic suicide but there’s clearly no other way to demonstrate to Leavers what a shit show this all is.

Leavers resolutely refuse to listen to anything negative after 3 years, so fuck it.

I feel for those who woukd be affected by it but I didn’t cause it.

The irony is there’s not a Tory MP with the guts he cone PM and then to do it - so this mess will go on indefinitely.

I thought EU members didn't have the right to vote in the ref (but should have done IMO) but they did have the right to vote in these elections but were prevented. Supposedly by tory incompetence but probably really on purpose

Opal they didn't have the right to vote in the referendum (I agree they should have had the right), but should have in these elections. It's looking far too widespread to be an accident though.

Yes, that's what I was saying.

We has an opportunity to exit with No Deal and the prime minister did not let it happen.

Of course a deal is going to be sought. We could have left already with no deal ten times over.

All UK citizens SHOULD have been allowed to vote in the referendum. Many of those who live outside the UK but who are entitled to vote for up to 15 years after leaving permanently, were excluded.

This is TOTAL delusion. The UK has the 'best deal' with the EU

'Best' (unqualified) is a rather presumptuous descriptor.

I suspect we’ve just lost the very last ounce of patience the EU had left.

They aren’t going to stand for having 28 MEPs who loath everything the EU stands for.

You are right op

@1tisILeClerc They have left permanently. Why should they have been entitled to have a say in the future of the nation?

My understanding is that the purpose of No Deal is as a point from which to move forwards with a fair trade agreement with the EU

Then you have totally misunderstood no deal. What you have described above is the starting point for if and when the UK passes a Withdrawal Agreement. That sets in place transition arrangements so the UK can begin its trade deal discussions with the EU (and other nations) whole still allowing trade to continue relatively freely during the transition period, ie avoiding the "cliff edge".

If we leave with no deal whatsoever, our trade agreements with the EU and all other countries that we have trade deals with via the EU (so, everyone, basically) sop overnight and there will be hold ups for customs checks/implementation of tariffs etc immediately. The EU and other nations carry on trading as before with one another while the UK starts everything from scratch. We will be desperate for any sort of deal which would not exactly be negotiating from a position of strength.

TM understood the need for a withdrawal agreement, rather belatedly, but the damage had already been done. Her dangerous "no-deal is better than a bad deal" narrative had already become part of the public consciousness. I hope now she's resigned she'll have the courage to come out and admit she was wrong, but I doubt it.

I partly agree with OP that the only way to settle the Brexit fantasy is to let people see with their own eyes what no-deal really looks like and hope we can swiftly rejoin. But there is such total denial of any facts and realism among some leavers that I think they would still manage to blame something or someone else. And if we don't manage to rejoin quickly, the result would be devastating for the economy and I don't want that future for my DC.

Voter suppression of EU/UK citizens is illegal and a disgrace.

Legal action is being pursued through domestic courts, but EU parliament will take action too.

{ Gronky Mon 27-May-19 10:58:05
This is TOTAL delusion. The UK has the 'best deal' with the EU

'Best' (unqualified) is a rather presumptuous descriptor.}

The reality will be that it is better than the UK will get when it leaves.

{ JustSomebodie Mon 27-May-19 11:18:10
@1tisILeClerc They have left permanently. Why should they have been entitled to have a say in the future of the nation?}

Mainly because it is the law. Most will still be paying into the UK tax and pensions schemes.
As members of the EU there are reciprocal arrangements to cover all citizens wherever their main residence happens to be.
Your comment suggests that you are ignorant of this and that you have an unpleasant attitude.

I partly agree with OP that the only way to settle the Brexit fantasy is to let people see with their own eyes what no-deal really looks like and hope we can swiftly rejoin. But there is such total denial of any facts and realism among some leavers that I think they would still manage to blame something or someone else. And if we don't manage to rejoin quickly, the result would be devastating for the economy and I don't want that future for my DC.

It would be the fault of the EU for not giving us the deal we deserve. They would double down on the "blitz spirit" and "refuse to be starved into submission".

They have left permanently. Why should they have been entitled to have a say in the future of the nation?

This attitude makes my blood boil.

1. You don't know if they have left permanently. Who are you to decide?

2. The referendum changed the rights of BRITISH CITIZENS irrespective of where they live. The referendum was not just about the future of the UK but the future of its citizens. Why should only some citizens be entitled to have a say on the future of other British citizens? That is not democracy.

The irony is there’s not a Tory MP with the guts he cone PM and then to do it - so this mess will go on indefinitely.

Do we not think BJ just might?

DippyAvocado, I understand what a withdrawal agreement is but the one that was offered would put Britain in a position where the only way forwards is either reaching a new agreement (which any single remaining member of the EU can veto) or the UK breaking a previously signed treaty.

{They aren’t going to stand for having 28 MEPs who loath everything the EU stands for.}

But do they? Their 'job' as an MEP is to represent the UK citizens and do so without compromising others in the UK.
If they were to stand up at every debate and simply spout 'bollocks to the EU' to begin with they will quickly be ignored by the other 700 odd members. Only by lobbying other MEPs outside the chamber and persuading them that the UK is 'right' will it have any effect, but this is what happens anyway. It will simply show the UK up as a bunch of tossers though if they all use the 'Farage' tactics.

Do we not think BJ just might?

Nope! He’ll huff and puff about doing it but he knows what a disaster it would be so won’t actually push the button.

{I understand what a withdrawal agreement is but the one that was offered would put Britain in a position where the only way forwards is either reaching a new agreement}

The WA as presented is the legal process to uncouple the 750 or more treaties that exist between the UK and the EU. It is essentially what D Davies and others SHOULD have written but they didn't. Thus the EU did the bulk of the graft. The UK had the opportunity to write what they wanted (bearing in mind the EU's principle pillars) but didn't, and in the Chequers paper, almost all the UK 'demands' directly contravened EU principles. If you write an essay for school and you use the wrong subject, you get no points and have to do it again.
The UK still has the opportunity not to leave all the 750 or so treaties (CU/SM being among them) but the PROCESS will not be changed and this was written into EU law when Theresa asked for the extension until October.

Northern Ireland?

And so long as this Government is propped up by the money grabbing DUP there will be extensions and stalls.

the only way forwards is either reaching a new agreement (which any single remaining member of the EU can veto) or the UK breaking a previously signed treaty

But this will remain the only way forward if we leave with no deal. With the disadvantage that the ensuing chaos will leave us even weaker and make us look like a nation that cannot negotiate - hardly a good position to be in when you need to start negotiating with pretty much everyone.

Just as a reminder. In December the EU said that the WA as written will not be changed. This was reaffirmed when Theresa requested the extension until October 31st.
They have also said that there will be no trade negotiations until the WA is signed.

Apart from anything else, WTO rules state that all interested parties must be involved in trade negotiations, and as the UK is part of the EU trade block, EVERYTHING that the UK trades via the EU (70 countries in all) will have to be negotiated with the EU present, and they have vetos. This will not happen until AFTER the WA is signed so the hooligans in Westminster can shout and scream all they like but this fact is inescapable. If BoJo or others say otherwise, they are lying.

This will not happen until AFTER the WA is signed so the hooligans in Westminster can shout and scream all they like but this fact is inescapable. If BoJo or others say otherwise, they are lying.

I don’t think there is a single Leaver who believes this. Most think no deal means no WA and the rest think the EU will concede on this.

It needs to be shouted from the roof tops by every Remain politician.

Bearbehind
Exactly, this is why I keep saying it.
There are 2 sides to every 'deal' and the leaders of 27 countries have said how it will be. I believe them over the contents of Westminster. To her (perhaps only) credit, Theresa understood this position which is why she made such an effort to get it passed.
Anything can be achieved AFTER it is signed, and nothing before.

Even I’m still not convinced it is true though.

Can you find a link which states that in the event of No Deal we would still have to sign the WA?