Brexit mega thread part 12: David Cameron: Return of the King

[SerendipityJane]

(previous thread)

That's "king" as a suffix not a prefix. Also part of a phrase.

She's the one who drew the "red lines" which ruled out any kind of sensible trade arrangement, not to mention stealing our freedom of movement.

She had a poisoned chalice and the ERG to try to please with the red lines, who were never going to be ruled by a woman. What Boris got was worse for trade and a load of false promises about NI. She got the Nissan deal which is still mentioned. I will agree to disagree but I think out of the lot she would have given us more than we have currently once Brexit was a done deal. Although I do remember she had an out there too that she didn't use.

This is what she chose, presumably egged on by Nick Timothy. Philip Hammond describing here how horrified he was.

She was before Boris / Alexander

her fault

And that was because she called the unnecessary 2017 election and pissed away a working majority.

I can remember her screaming to the palace before the results were final to be ready to have a bunfight with the Queen. If you look closely you can see the car takes a corner on 2 wheels.

And then the totally wasted £10 billion to the DUP in the same breath as telling nurses to go fuck themselves as "there's no magic money tree".

You may have come here to praise Theresa May. I have come here to bury her. In her own actions.

Strange days.
Liz Truss who has political opinions that are 95% barking
finds the 5% to bring in a pretty sensible backbench bill
https://twitter.com/trussliz/status/1766762758404456484

In light of the Irish referendum results
politicians who LISTEN are needed

May had the opportunity NOT to trigger article 50 but to take a step back and calm everything down. She didn't - that will always be her legacy.

Stopped clock and all that

Should have listened to those pesky experts...

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/newsletters/2024-03-07/world-economy-latest-brexit-gloom

Oh...

https://www.ft.com/content/154a187a-4b35-483d-900e-5bc85894df4a

Seems 30p Lee Anderson is off to join Reform. Then off to the Job Centre after the next election...😂

So he wasn't happy with Labour ...
Wasn't happy with Tories ...

I be he tells jokes about women who cant' make their mind up too.

@Eyesopenwideawake May had the opportunity NOT to trigger article 50 but to take a step back and calm everything down. She didn't - that will always be her legacy.

The EU stated that Article 50 had to be triggered before any discussions on the Withdrawal Agreement could commence. This was confirmed by the Irish MEP, Mairead McGuiness, on the 4 April 2019 episode of Question Time in response to comments that the EU were to blame for Article 50 being triggered too soon.

Article 50 was triggered by 498 MPs 0n 29 March 2017.

Although Article 50 needed to be triggered before we commenced negotiations with the EU we should have used the time prior to doing so to decide what Brexit should look like given the marginal nature of the decision. In fact the narrative was dominated by those who wanted a hard Brexit and no consideration was given to potential pitfalls.

@VimtoVimto we should have used the time prior to doing so to decide what Brexit should look like.

Until UK left the EU, transition periods inlcuded, it was not possible to commence discussions regards trade with any Country. So, it was not possible to know in advance of the vote what Brexit would look like.

In fact the narrative was dominated by those who wanted a hard Brexit and no consideration was given to potential pitfalls.

I would say the narrative was dominated by remain supporting MPs whose objective was to ignore the referendum result.

@GlobeTrotter2000 we could have had discussions around whether we wanted the much mentioned Norway solution and which EU institutions it would be beneficial to be aligned to among other things. The people who dominated the discussions and rejected May’s deals were the ERG and cronies.

There is no way that such a narrow majority should have been acted on in the way it was without deciding what Brexit would look like or how we wanted it to look like. All through the campaign people like Daniel Hannan and Farage were stating that we would not be leaving the Single Market.

Yep. The only thought May had given was to keep repeating "Brexit means Brexit". None of the Brexshiteers had the slightest idea what they were doing, and so pulled the plug.

And we're all paying the price...

It seems that 30p Lee once backed the idea of letting constituents trigger a by-election when their MP changed parties. It's strange now that he's done so himself he is not keen on the idea.

6 bob nob a hypocrite? Surely not...

Until UK left the EU, transition periods inlcuded, it was not possible to commence discussions regards trade with any Country. So, it was not possible to know in advance of the vote what Brexit would look like.

Gosh. What a well thought through project it all was.

That was only because they were the conditions the UK accepted. We could (and should) have had much more "talks about talks". Only the problem with that was the Brexiteers damn well knew they were cashing a dodgy cheque, and the more time that went on, the more people would start noticing that it was written on a beermat and signed by "M. Mouse". So there was an unholy hurry to seal the deal as quick as possible and fuck the UK as long as we get our payout.

@VimtoVimto The people who dominated the discussions and rejected May’s deals were the ERG and cronies.

Cymru, LibDems and SNP voted unanimously against T May every time. Not because they thought it was a bad deal, but to ignore the referendum result.

The number of Labour MPs who voted for T May's deal, in each of the three time it was presented, never exceeded 5. Had Labour stood by their manifesto promise of honouring the referendum result, T May's deal would have passed easily.

Labour changed their minds as they thought the 40% of the vote they won in 2017 was genuine and had nothing to do with the promise to cancel student loans. So, they voted against anything conservative as they thought they could force and win a general election. The result of the 2019 general election proved how wrong labour had been.

The result of the 2019 election showed just how bad the FPTP system is...

@borntobequiet Gosh. What a well thought through project it all was.

The terms and condition of Article 50 were developed over the period 2002 to 2009. All EU members signed Article 50 in December 2009.

@SerendipityJane That was only because they were the conditions the UK accepted.

The conditions of Article 50 were accepted by all EU members in 2009.

"We could (and should) have had much more "talks about talks"

This point was raised by Fiona Bruce in the 4 April 2019 episode of Question Time. The Irish MEP, Mairead McGuiness, stated that UK must first trigger Article 50 before discussions on the Withdrawal Agreement could commence.

Only the problem with that was the Brexiteers damn well knew they were cashing a dodgy cheque, and the more time that went on, the more people would start noticing that it was written on a beermat and signed by "M. Mouse". So there was an unholy hurry to seal the deal as quick as possible and fuck the UK as long as we get our payout.

Same answer as was given to Vimto. Had the "We want Brexit to be cancelled" MPs not voted against T May's deal, in the hope that Brexit would be cancelled, her deal would have passed the first time.

@HannibalHeyes The result of the 2019 election showed just how bad the FPTP system is...

Been round this before too. If FPTP is not supported by the electorate, why do they continue to vote for the two major parties, Conservatives and Labour, who, to my knowledge, have never campaigned to abandon the FPTP?

Also, let's not forget that if the 16.1 million who voted remain in 2016 voted LibDems in 2019, these threads would not exist.