So Johnson has 30 days to come up with an alternative to the backstop......

[Bearbehind]

This will be interesting to watch!

bellini why don’t you understand that this isn’t about this one vote, it’s about the Tories staying in power.

I honestly can’t get my head round the fact you think Brexit is the only thing that matters to these people - it certainly isn’t.

Staying in power takes priority and if they lose the DUPs support over this, the Tories are out.

And so Johnson does his Faridge impersonation, revives the fortunes of the Tories and gets a big enough number of MPs in a new Parliament after the inevitable general election.
Don't you see that?

I'm not saying this suggestion is foolproof or perfect or any of those things but it has never been tried.

And they’d want to revert to no deal because they see anything else as a cop out. Plus the Tories would be back in a collision, if they were lucky.

If labour got rid of Corbyn then they could well win, or at least form a coalition.

it has never been tried.

For crying out loud - it fucking well has.

Who is "they"?

It fucking well hasn't.

bellin did you honestly miss the point where TM announced exactly what you are suggesting, then Arlene had her guts for garters and she had to back track?

That's Arlene. That's not Parliament.

I have no intention of pleasing the DUP on this. But I think enough opposition MPs might go for it.

I’m out - I can’t keep saying this.

I’ve told you and so have several others, why the Tories won’t bring it before parliament.

If you can’t see that then you’re no better than those who can’t see that Brexit won’t deliver the promised unicorns.

It’s a complete failure to acknowledge reality.

Bye No Dealer. I hope you get everything you wish for.

A solution to the Irish border conundrum, if it can be found, should have been described in detail before Article 50 was triggered

A border protocol in Article 50 would have been even better. UK would have left EU on 29 March 2019 had more thought been put into Article 50.

Development of Article 50 began around 2000 before it was signed off by all 28 EU members. So over a period of 9 years nobody in EU considered the possibility of either ROI or UK might vote to leave the EU.

If EU were so certain that no members would ever vote to leave what was the point of Article 50 at all?

I’m not actually leaving my own thread - I’m just not continuing to argue this with you because it’s pointless.

You carry on with your one woman crusade on something that’s been tried before and is even less likely to succeed than changing our red lines or agreeing the WA if you chose but I suspect most people will just be ignoring you.

"If EU were so certain that no members would ever vote to leave what was the point of Article 50 at all?"
You might well wonder. Thing is, if someone like Italy or Greece left, you wouldn't have the GFA type issues to deal with. So they could go via Article 50.
It was assumed, I suppose , that neither the UK nor ROI would want to threaten the fragile peace they worked so hard for and that no one would listen to the "swivel eyed loons" as I believe they were called.

Cheers @Bearbehind . Make you mind up. In /Out? Sound familiar?

You just want us to revoke and give in. I'll rather have rations and be an independent nation than surrender to the EU will.
When will people understand we are a power house not a bunch of nobodies.
We are going to make a success out of leaving and I wish more people got behind honouring the result of the referendum.
It's almost like people are cheering at the EU.

@MysteryTripAgain - A border protocol in Article 50 would have been even better. UK would have left EU on 29 March 2019 had more thought been put into Article 50

That's a ridiculous suggestion. If they were up consider every single implication for every single member, A50 would have taken forever to write and would have been ridiculously prescriptive.

A much more reasonable assumption would be to assume member states would behave with integrity and choose an exit that would not contravene their other commitments.

Please do not tag me ever again

My pleasure.

You just want us to revoke and give in

Who does?

I certainly don’t anymore.

Too much damage has been done for that.

bellini I know you said you were old but you’re not really acting your age.

You only tagged me because you know it pisses me off and I’ve asked you before not to do it.

I’m happy to continue sensible discussions with you but I think it’s clear there is no point in continuing with this particular subject

thornhill has just proved exactly why I think no deal is the only option.

Absolutely no facts, figures or experts are going to change their views.

Let them live off rations if need be - if they think they’re happy to do that then making it happen is the only solution.

All the rest of us can do is make preparations to limit our personal damage.

If they were up consider every single implication for every single member, A50 would have taken forever to write and would have been ridiculously prescriptive

That was not suggested. The only 2 EU members that have an agreement external to their EU agreement with respect to their border is ROI and UK, ie the GFA. None of the other 26 members have such an agreement. Hence Article 50 should have had a specific protocol for GFA, but it makes no reference to GFA at all.

Considering that UK has had a trade deficit with EU since 1999, even though it is the third largest donor to the EU, it was only a matter of time before they wanted out.

@MysteryTripAgain - regardless, it is reasonable to expect a member to comply with their commitments when choosing to leave (you know - integrity). There are multiple leave options that would allow the UK to comply with the GFA. The UK are choosing to exit in a way that contravenes their obligations.