The Brexit Arms

[BrexitArmsLandlady]

🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧

Go BoJo!
Go BoJo!
Go BoJo!
Go BoJo!

So near & yet so far..............

🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧

"It really comes down to whether or not the EU would truly prefer a no deal scenario or not"
No. It's the other way around. If the UK doesn't move on the customs issue, for example, it will be the UK that forces No Deal.

The parties that want to cancel Brexit will vote against any form of WA.

That is what will force a no deal.

Agree Mystery

If the UK doesn't move on the customs issue, for example, it will be the UK that forces No Deal.

Perhaps.
But my comment remains true nonetheless:

"It really comes down to whether or not the EU would truly prefer a no deal scenario or not"

No deal is the legal default, EU know this.

It doesn't matter if they'd prefer WA as is or not - if it won't pass WM then it ceases to be a viable outcome

I cannot comprehend how it makes any sense at all to refuse to budge on backstop (citing backstop as being essential), when by not budging on it they are vastly increasing likelihood of no deal at all

And screwing with GFA is ok? Which is what the UK government is proposing. As well as screwing with the single market.

If I was BJ I'd be bringing an indicative vote to parliament with his new proposal

The outcome will then give the EU a solid indication as to whether a transition deal based on this will pass WM

EU will then know whether it is worth even looking at

If it fails to gain enough support in Parliament then no point at all for EU to even consider it

Why does the UK need to try and blame EU?

I don't get it. Especially since 17.4 million support NO deal (constantly mentioned here and elsewhere) - I know that's a crock of shit.

But still why the need to play the blame game?

However, the extension act gives the EU the power to control extension, including length of extension

This is inaccurate.

If the European Council offers a further extension, but to a date other than 31 January 2020, the Prime Minister has two choices. Either he can:

(a) agree to that extension, or

(b) ask the House of Commons (within two calendar days) whether it wishes to approve that extension.

If the House of Commons “decides not to pass” a specifically-worded motion approving the extension, the Prime Minister then has a free choice whether or not to agree to the extension.

That is what will force a no deal

What is driving a no-deal exit is BJ winning the next GE, any form of WA will hemorrhage votes to the BXP.

So, fool leavers (easily done) into blaming EU/remainers and they'll stick with the Cons and its working isn't it.

Random - because of the ensuing economic chaos, Tories need a no-deal to defeat the BXP but want blame to be attached to traitorous remainers and the intransigent EU.

However, the extension act gives the EU the power to control extension, including length of extension

"This is inaccurate."

It's entirely accurate & EU know it

The anti-brexit coalition have more numbers in Parliament than govt do

Whatever extension the EU offer will be accepted by WM

Of course it’s inaccurate - the HoC can reject any extension other than to the 31/1/20.

The anti-brexit coalition have more numbers in Parliament than govt do

The EU cannot force Parliament to accept any extension offer - that is not in its control.

Tough shit that Parliament might believe a different extension length might be more appropriate.

Jasjas indeed - but still they can't see it.

I would be worried if my govt were trying to deflect blame.

I would really question the integrity of the members of govt and ask myself what's in it for them.

Blimey, I think we are actually leaving on 31st. Can’t believe it.

I honestly don't think we will tbh dirty

The EU know that an extension is in the bag so have no pressure to do anything other than repeat their assertion that the current WA with backstop is 'only deal on offer'

Anti Brexit coalition have control of Parliament until there is a GE

EU may gamble on a GE producing another anti-Brexit majority
BJ & Tories are gambling on a pro Brexit majority

Either way, the 'surrender act', rather than 'ensuring no deal' has instead created the situation whereby every actor is prepared to roll the dice & take the risk

Hmm. So another year of uncertainty?

That’s all we need.

@DustyDiamond

Do you really think that parliament is majority anti-Brexit?

I mean, I can see that point of view, but Labour increased their seats on the back of a manifesto which said they want a Brexit deal, but would rule out no deal. They’re just sticking by what their manifesto said are they not?

Obviously the SNP, Lib Dem and Con remain supporters are a different story.

At this point we just need an election, and for some party to have a majority one way or another. I’d agree with that wholeheartedly (even speaking as a remain supporter who accepts we should be leave, and that it would likely be a leave majority).

Personally, I’ve always been a bit sceptical that the threat of no deal was much of an incentive for the EU side to budge. They can read - they know they’ve spent three years preparing for that eventuality, and the UK have not.

At this point we need to stop no deal, bin Boris Johnson and the lot Cameron once called "fruitcakes" and REVOKE ARTICLE 50 ASAP.

gonna - Lib Dem, SNP & majority of Labour want either to stop Brexit completely or have a 2nd ref.

Jeremy Corbyn is also clear that Labour will never countenance voting for anything that govt puts forward

The only way anything can pass current Parliament is if Tories (including ERG), DUP & enough Labour rebels & independent MPs vote for it

Labour & Tories both stood on a brexit manifesto but Labour have since shifted to Remain as have some former Tories

The Parliament we have is not the Parliament elected in 2017 - too many MPs now support the opposite Brexit stance than that on which they were elected

I absolutely agree with you re a GE badly needed to move forward - Parliament is a hot mess at the moment & too full of grandstanding

Frank Field is on the money as ever.

Suggested to BJ that the house should have an indicative vote on the proposal & also to add to political declaration re explicit assurances on workers rights & environment standards

Unfortunately BJ didn't seem to advocate a vote before the final agreement sorted

Hopefully he'll reflect on this as I think the EU needs to be shown whether or not it's even worth considering (ie if it won't pass Parliament then it's a non starter & not worth pursuing)

@DustyDiamond

Jeremy Corbyn is also clear that Labour will never countenance voting for anything that govt puts forward

Fair point, that definitely contradicts the Brexit with a deal manifesto position. And yes, absolutely, there never should have been political grandstanding over this. It’s too important for such games, but it’s all the current crop of MPs seem to be fit for.

I wrote to my Labour MP and asked him to vote for the WA quite a few times, which of course he didn’t. He’s definitely one of the remain MPs you’re talking about, although to be fair it’s a remain constituency...

I wrote to my Tory MP before every vote as well - he voted against twice & for it the last time

My MP isn't one of the intransigent self-described 'spartans' though so I expect he'll vote for BJ's WA if it comes to it

(My constituency was 53% Remain)

I've been heartily sick of the grandstanding on all sides of this for ages now (across parties, and either side of Brexit)

GE is only way forward imo - it may be a hung Parliament again but at least it will be a fresh start (hopefully with the added bonus of Corbyn getting replaced as Labour leader 🤞)

@DustyDiamond

Getting rid of Corbyn... the dream... something to unite us again (well, most of us anyway)!

😂

True!!

I would agree with Frank Field except that the experience with the Malthouse Compromise, which passed Parliament, was that the EU indicated they would reject it out of hand to the extent that TM didn't even bother to push it formally.

This is further away from the EU's starting position than Malthouse was.

Indications coming out of EU seem to be that they are looking to rubbish it as quick as possible which takes away any incentive for Soft Remainers
in Parliament to compromise. Then again it also highlights that the EU/TM objective really was BRINO permanently. This is harder to sell to soft Leavers who were open to the suggestion that the WA left open a range of options from Norway to Canada (even though it really didn't)