Brexit negotiations thread

[Another Surrey Shrimper]

And there you go again. It was May AND the EU that failed to reach a negotiated deal. Negotiations and compromise take two and any failure of said negotiations is down to both parties. You can place the blame at whatever side you like and a that will no doubt be influenced by your political leanings but it's fact.

It was very telling this morning at 6.15am and watching an interview on the BBC outside Parliament with a pro leave Brexit Tory MP and a staunch remain MP from the opposition. When the Tory MP pointed out to camera that in any negotiation you have to be prepared to walk away and also make it known your prepared to walk away and all the remain Labour MP could do was stand there shaking her head from side to side. That just about sums it up really.

Sure, May and the EU. But we don't decide who represents the 27 in the EU, we decided on her, and she has absolutely ****ed it.

The threat to walk away would have been worth something a few months back but now as we have a new deal vote planned 2 months before we leave the EU will be able to see that we very much aren't 'prepared' to walk away and idle threats are not the way forward.

 

[GBJ]

To be fair I don't know his past politics I'm going purely on Brexit, everything I have seen and heard from him has aligned with my opinion

I think his outburst was earlier this week, possibly Monday?

Anyway, It’s the same David Lammy who believes that stop & search is racist.

The same David Lammy who was an advocate for the Iraq war, yet was against the Iraq war being investigated.

The same David Lammy who back in 2015 voted in favour of an EU referendum

Guy’s a complete helmet.

I don't see that opposition parties being involved in discussions with May will change anything, she already knows their positions and disagrees. I think it's a PR exercise.

Maybe, but even so, It doesn’t paint Corbyn in a good light, especially if the other party leaders show willing & he does not.

I know he can do no wrong in your eyes, but take your Labour blinkers off for a second & try and see how it looks to those of us who aren’t fanatical reds.

To those who distrust/dislike him, it’s another stick to beat him with. To those who are neutral, who’s votes he could potentially court, I fail to see how it could look positive.

 

[Another Surrey Shrimper]

Yes, but MK doesn't sit in all of them and it was him I was talking to

He is worth sticking with, never know when he will bless us with another fridge-gate thread!

 

[Bielzibubz]

Sure, May and the EU. But we don't decide who represents the 27 in the EU, we decided on her, and she has absolutely ****ed it.

The threat to walk away would have been worth something a few months back but now as we have a new deal vote planned 2 months before we leave the EU will be able to see that we very much aren't 'prepared' to walk away and idle threats are not the way forward.

Agreed she was shyte at it but that doesn't mean she was solely to blame.

We are more prepared for a no deal Brexit now than we were a few months ago and it's not an idle threat if you are prepared to act on it.

 

[MK Shrimper]

He is worth sticking with, never know when he will bless us with another fridge-gate thread!

This world & website could do with a bit of levity....but I think all my gaffs are done! (or I won't make them public!)

 

[Massimo Giovanni]

If, (quoting A.S.S. '#4471) the no deal is an "idle threat" why wont your Leader join the discussion?

 

[yogi bear up the cagire]

Is this a good idea, especially considering some of his MP's have already had meetings? Tactically, I'm wondering if this a big mistake, laying down conditions, in a situation which is so critical for the country. It may well be, as Labour have suggested, a stunt. So, what's the problem of engaging and maybe then showing it up for what it is?


16:17

Corbyn tells Labour MPs not to 'engage' until no-deal threat removed
The Labour leader has written a letter to all his MPs urging them not to "engage" with the government until the threat of no-deal has been removed.

 

[mattitouk]

It does come across as a mistake to me, like as you say some Labour mp's appear to have rebelled against his request not to meet with the government.

 

[Another Surrey Shrimper]

If, (quoting A.S.S. '#4471) the no deal is an "idle threat" why wont your Leader join the discussion?

To ensure it remains an idle threat. May is untrustworthy.

 

[Another Surrey Shrimper]

Official Government guidance says it will take a year to organise a second referendum. MPs involved in the Brexit talks were handed a one page document setting out the timeline today.

Other MPs are saying it can be ratified in a month.

 

[Another Surrey Shrimper]

BBC: Cooper and Benn emerge after long meeting with David Lidington - absolutely adamant that PM has to take no deal off the table before there can be any compromise - they say also that Lidington did not mention any new ideas or ways forward.

 

[Tangled up in Blue]

Is it something parliament could sort out it self to do? From what I said earlier I think the best chance for consensus could be around another vote. For that reason I can't see May giving a chance to promote it. I don't know whether Corbyn would welcome a free vote either, as it may force his hand on backing a second vote which really doesn't appear to interest him at all.

Yes,apparently:Harold Wison, of course,was wily enough to let Labour have a free vote when the enabling legislation for the UK's entry into the EEC was first enacted back in 1971.Doubt if JC would be minded to do the same.

 

[mattitouk]

 

[Spaceman Spiff]

View attachment 7057

Pardon?

 

[yogi bear up the cagire]

Say what you want about May but she does seem to enjoy playing the game of narrowing options. Difficult to see a second vote when the civil service claim it will take a year to organise! Surely logic dictates, she is playing down the clock, banking on this to extract more concessions from the EU, or scare over a 100 MP'S into changing their minds in fear of no deal. Good luck with either of those options. I'm starting to think that, if parliament doesn't rest some control over this, we could be heading for a no deal.
Downing St rules out delaying Brexit
The PM's spokeswoman has just been taking questions from journalists at their twice-daily briefing.
She says that if the EU offered to extend Article 50 - delaying Brexit - the UK would say no.
She adds that talks with opposition politicians to find a way to break the Brexit deadlock in parliament have been "constructive".
The PM will also be holding talks EU leaders in the next few days.

 

[Bielzibubz]

Is this a good idea, especially considering some of his MP's have already had meetings? Tactically, I'm wondering if this a big mistake, laying down conditions, in a situation which is so critical for the country. It may well be, as Labour have suggested, a stunt. So, what's the problem of engaging and maybe then showing it up for what it is?


16:17

Corbyn tells Labour MPs not to 'engage' until no-deal threat removed
The Labour leader has written a letter to all his MPs urging them not to "engage" with the government until the threat of no-deal has been removed.

I rest my case about nothing being more important to JC than getting to No10, regardless of cost to the UK and it's population. He'll gladly see this country on its knees before he swallows an once of dignity and humility and sits down with his enemy and does the right thing here and now.

And if you take his 5th paragraph of that letter that's basically staying in the EU, that's NOT what was voted for nor what he and his party agreed to when agreeing to A50 being invoked

The man is a ***t and a liability to this country.

 

[mattitouk]

Pardon?

I don't know what happened / went wrong there, i was trying to copy and paste TM's letter to JC on the BBC news website.

Maybe Yogi, could do it (as he did with the earlier one in #4,747).

 

[yogi bear up the cagire]

I don't know what happened / went wrong there, i was trying to copy and paste TM's letter to JC on the BBC news website.

Maybe Yogi, could do it (as he did with the earlier one in #4,747).

Is this it?

What has Theresa May said?
In her reply, Mrs May said: "I note that you have said that 'ruling out' no deal is a precondition before we can meet, but that is an impossible condition because it is not within the Government's power to rule out no deal.

"Let me explain why. Under Article 50 of the Treaty on European Union and the Withdrawal Act 2018, we will leave the EU without a deal on 29 March unless Parliament either agrees a deal with the EU or the UK revokes article 50 and chooses to stay in the EU permanently.

"So there are two way to avoid no deal: either vote for a deal, in particular a Withdrawal Agreement, that has been agreed with the EU, or to revoke Article 50 and overturn the referendum result.

"I believe it would be wrong to overturn the referendum result."

She wrote that she would be "happy" to discuss Mr Corbyn's proposals.

On Wednesday night, speaking outside Downing Street after talks with the Lib Dems, SNP and Plaid Cymru, Mrs May called on MPs to "put self-interest aside".

"It will not be an easy task, but MPs know they have a duty to act in the national interest, reach a consensus and get this done," she said.

Separately, Downing Street said the government has produced a "very short paper setting out the factual detail on the number of months required" to hold another EU referendum, which suggests it would take "in excess of a year".

The point of the document was to "inform the expected discussion" Mrs May was likely to have with MPs who back another public vote, government sources say.

 

[mattitouk]

Almost, it was just below it, the letter in full has the 10 downing street logo at the top of the picture.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/46874049

Maybe the bbc have protected it from being copied somehow, as i tried again, without any luck.

On the other hand it might just be me, being useless.

 

[Bielzibubz]

So, let me get this straight. Under Article 50 and by law we have to leave the EU on the 29th of March unless said Article 50 is revoked and the referendum is overturned, yes?

Now, with that being the case, and I assume that is indeed true, why has JC said it's a pre-condition of any talks with TM that a no deal Brexit be taken off the table? Surely as the leader of Her Majesty's Opposition and with a large legal team at his disposal he would, and does, know this. Now, with that being the case it then begs the question has JC go an ulterior motive for insisting the no deal be removed?

Perhaps he thinks if he pushed far enough she'll resign and the door to No10 becomes a little more ajar.