Countdown to AreMaygeddon (the s.t.b. ex-PM thread)

[pigamus]

I want the first referendum again, the 1975 one. Peter Shore, Jeremy Thorpe, Barbara Castle, all that. Lovely.

[mothman]

It's pretty obvious the ERG-grade Leavers are terrified of a second referendum/people's vote. Even though I don't think anybody who isn't hopelessly deluded would think a Remain result is now (or ever was) a sure thing. But if it was Remain they know it'd be game over, all their dreams torn asunder, no PM Boris, all their rich friends who'd been hoping to be able to treat their employees like serfs won't talk to them anymore...

The reason I say this - hashtag-not-a-Brexit-post - is that I wonder if that fear might cause them to support the deal. To them, no deal is better than a bad deal; but a bad deal is better than any possibility of remaining. A bad deal lets them kick their own can down the road; "if Corbyn can kick his own people's-vote can down the road," they might say, "then why can't we?"

[Replies From View]

I want the first referendum again, the 1975 one. Peter Shore, Jeremy Thorpe, Barbara Castle, all that. Lovely.

Norris McWhirter, Ross McWhirter, Roy Castle and all that lot.

[canadagoose]

I want the first referendum again, the 1975 one.

Have you just had a change of heart?

[Shoulders?-Stomach!]

It's pretty obvious the ERG-grade Leavers are terrified of a second referendum/people's vote. Even though I don't think anybody who isn't hopelessly deluded would think a Remain result is now (or ever was) a sure thing. But if it was Remain they know it'd be game over, all their dreams torn asunder, no PM Boris, all their rich friends who'd been hoping to be able to treat their employees like serfs won't talk to them anymore...

The reason I say this - hashtag-not-a-Brexit-post - is that I wonder if that fear might cause them to support the deal. To them, no deal is better than a bad deal; but a bad deal is better than any possibility of remaining. A bad deal lets them kick their own can down the road; "if Corbyn can kick his own people's-vote can down the road," they might say, "then why can't we?"

It's pretty clear they hate this deal even more tban that, given it provides hardly anything they were really looking for and/or they see it as a "defeat" for the nation (despite it being their fault in the first place).

[biggytitbo]

It's pretty clear they hate this deal even more tban that, given it provides hardly anything they were really looking for and/or they see it as a "defeat" for the nation (despite it being their fault in the first place).

Not the 544 MPs who voted to have the referendum under these terms?

[DrGreggles]

Were the terms of the referendum voted on? Or just that there would be a referendum?

[biggytitbo]

Were the terms of the referendum voted on? Or just that there would be a referendum?

Its an act of parliament and they had several debates about it.

Anyway, from the Sun, every Cabbers goto for politics -

[DrGreggles]

Its an act of parliament and they had several debates about it.

So were the terms voted on by the numbers you mentioned, or just that there should be a referendum?

[Urinal Cake]

A second referendum will extend the deadline which I think will play into the hands of leavers since now they can get the deal they want.

Even if no deal is what they will take- as Mothman said.

[Zetetic]

So were the terms voted on by the numbers you mentioned, or just that there should be a referendum?

The text of the question and answers were voted on : http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2015/36/contents/enacted

The meaning and consequences of either choice were not defined beyond that at that point.

[Zetetic]

A second referendum will extend the deadline which I think will play into the hands of leavers since now they can get the deal they want.

How?

[Captain Z]

Its an act of parliament and they had several debates about it.

Anyway, from the Sun, every Cabbers goto for politics -

Some of those 107 Tories can be whipped into voting in favour, some will abstain rather than vote against. Same goes for Lib Dems. DUP can be bribed. A few Labour rebels/abstainees. It will pass.

[Huxleys Babkins]

Once they realise that a vote against means "no deal" and not "referendum" or "election" or "extension" or "cancellation" or "Norway" or "Canada", I think it will pass easily. There's no majority for any alternative, there's nothing else on offer from the EU and there's no time left for a referendum, let alone any consensus as to what the options should be.

Nobody wants their fingerprints on "no deal" except for the Torykipper mentalists and Kate Hoey.

It might take a couple of attempts, but it'll pass.

[ZoyzaSorris]

It wont. The Tory rebels will probably dwindle a bit on the day but there is no incentive whatsoever for anyone beyond that.
Because there are clear alternatives. As a result no deal - which we know that no government here or the EU will allow to happen - simply isnt a credible threat.

[greencalx]

It wont. The Tory rebels will probably dwindle a bit on the day but there is no incentive whatsoever for anyone beyond that.
Because there are clear alternatives. As a result no deal - which we know that no government here or the EU will allow to happen - simply isnt a credible threat.

Even biggy's admitted that "No deal" doesn't actually mean "No deal" but a basket of ad-hoc deals to paper over the cracks until we get our collective arse together. One would imagine that such a collection of deals would amount to something like 500 pages of text with various assurances about the NI border and contributions to the EU budget so that goods and services can continue to flow freely in the short term.

[Huxleys Babkins]

It wont. The Tory rebels will probably dwindle a bit on the day but there is no incentive whatsoever for anyone beyond that.
Because there are clear alternatives. As a result no deal - which we know that no government here or the EU will allow to happen - simply isnt a credible threat.

There are alternatives, but no majority for any of them to pass through parliament and few that the EU would even accept.

All while the clock ticks down.

The thing about "no deal" is that nobody has to vote for it. It just happens by default.

[Paul Calf]

Even biggy's admitted that "No deal" doesn't actually mean "No deal" but a basket of ad-hoc deals to paper over the cracks until we get our collective arse together. One would imagine that such a collection of deals would amount to something like 500 pages of text with various assurances about the NI border and contributions to the EU budget so that goods and services can continue to flow freely in the short term.

You mean, like the withdrawal agreement?

I still fail to understand how an agreement on how to proceed will be reached in two months when they've been squabbling for two years over exactly that.



Worth a punt?

[Alberon]

May herself blurted out that a possible outcome to a vote defeat could be no Brexit and has been trying to backtrack ever since. We all know the EU would prefer us not to leave and beyond some posturing from some European leaders they'd take that option in a shot.

The result of a deal vote defeat is not an immediate No Deal Brexit. All MPs know this. Also many Tory Leaver MPs see her deal as BRINO not Brexit.

Nothing is guaranteed, especially in the bizzaro universe we've found ourselves in the last few years,  but a deal vote defeat for the government still looks very likely.

[pigamus]

The Daily Heil's U-turn is pretty hilarious. Will their own readers turn on them?

[ZoyzaSorris]

There are alternatives, but no majority for any of them to pass through parliament and few that the EU would even accept.

All while the clock ticks down.

The thing about "no deal" is that nobody has to vote for it. It just happens by default.

Extending the A50 deadline will pose no problem at all when neither side want a crash-out no deal.

[DrGreggles]

May herself blurted out that a possible outcome to a vote defeat could be no Brexit and has been trying to backtrack ever since.

She said it twice.

She's trying to threaten Leavers with a 'no Brexit' outcome and Remainers with a 'No deal' outcome, and no one's buying her bullshit.

[greencalx]

You mean, like the withdrawal agreement?

Bingo.

She said it twice.

Once in Parliament. The first time could have been ascribed to a slip of the tongue. But the second...

[biggytitbo]

Even biggy's admitted that "No deal" doesn't actually mean "No deal" but a basket of ad-hoc deals to paper over the cracks until we get our collective arse together. One would imagine that such a collection of deals would amount to something like 500 pages of text with various assurances about the NI border and contributions to the EU budget so that goods and services can continue to flow freely in the short term.

Thats basically what it means, no deal doesn't mean we fall off a cliff and literally have no arrangements about anything - it means we don't have a single overarching deal. There are hundreds of briefing documents about what the ad hoc temporary arrangements would be on the gov site. The spectre of the mad max no deal is a deliberate psychological operation designed to terrorise us into May's bodge job, or to just remain.

[Urinal Cake]

How?

May is rushing this through because of the deadline. If the second vote is leave again some members might be emboldened and push her and her deal out.

[Huxleys Babkins]

May herself blurted out that a possible outcome to a vote defeat could be no Brexit and has been trying to backtrack ever since. We all know the EU would prefer us not to leave and beyond some posturing from some European leaders they'd take that option in a shot.

The result of a deal vote defeat is not an immediate No Deal Brexit. All MPs know this. Also many Tory Leaver MPs see her deal as BRINO not Brexit.

Nothing is guaranteed, especially in the bizzaro universe we've found ourselves in the last few years,  but a deal vote defeat for the government still looks very likely.

Extending the A50 deadline will pose no problem at all when neither side want a crash-out no deal.

The EU have said they will consider extending or pausing Article 50 in the case of some extraordinary circumstance that prevents us from continuing negotiations such as a change of government, but they won't do it because we can't make our minds up. Don't forget that their no deal prep is far more advanced than ours. It'll hurt but they'll be ready.

By triggering article 50 in the first place, we sent the clearest instruction to the EU that we'd be leaving precisely 24 months after the notification regardless of the outcome of negotiations. MPs voted for it by 461 votes to 89. The opposition used a three line whip to force it through. They knew what they were voting for. They knew that "no deal" was a possibility.

The UK cannot claim ignorance.

[Howj Begg]

We'll also find out if A50 can be unilateraly revoked by Parliament this week

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/nov/27/brexit-european-court-to-rule-on-whether-article-50-can-be-reversed

I suspect the result of this will be at the back of some MPs minds

[Paul Calf]

Thats basically what it means, no deal doesn't mean we fall off a cliff and literally have no arrangements about anything - it means we don't have a single overarching deal. There are hundreds of briefing documents about what the ad hoc temporary arrangements would be on the gov site. The spectre of the mad max no deal is a deliberate psychological operation designed to terrorise us into May's bodge job, or to just remain.

How would that differ from the withdrawal agreement?

[biggytitbo]

We'd actually have left the EU.


Give is giving his wholeheartedly backing to May's deal, yet again proving what a Machiavellian sneak he is. How can you campaign for leave then back this?

[Huxleys Babkins]

We'll also find out if A50 can be unilateraly revoked by Parliament this week

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/nov/27/brexit-european-court-to-rule-on-whether-article-50-can-be-reversed

I suspect the result of this will be at the back of some MPs minds

It can be in the back of their minds, but there's no parliamentary majority to make it happen. It's useful in so much that it sets a legal precedent and will no doubt be useful if anyone needed to face criminal charges over their conduct in office regarding Brexit in the future.

How would that differ from the withdrawal agreement?

It will only cover the absolute bare minimum to stop the global and local economy from imploding. It's pure damage limitation and unsustainable long-term.