Discussion in 'UK politics, current affairs and news' started by Pickman's model, Jun 9, 2017.
Amuse me, what others do you have?
Exactly, s'not like Moses came down from Mt Sinai brandishing the Lisbon Treaty.
Cunts. Wreckers. Vainglorious romantics. Xenophobes. Idiots. Economic illiterates. Self-indulgent millenarians. Hand-wavers. Sloganeers. Scum. Racists. Tools of niche, predatory commercial interests. Luddites of public administration. Especes de cons. Arschlocher.
Sort of true, but the issue is what would happen if the UK wanted to withdraw Article 50 and preserve the status quo in its entirety, rebates and all, but some of the EU27 felt otherwise. If A50 is revocable, then we would be in a much better position.
So are you trying to say that you favour remaining in the EU, or what?
I'd rather sit on the fence and hint gently at my opinions, if that's okay. Apparently this can be a divisive topic.
This is, by far, the funniest post on here this year.
where is the incentive for the EU27 to offer sensible terms?
To be fair, the people who introduced me to that band could have been fairly described as wreckers, vainglorious romantics, self-indulgent millenarians, hand-wavers, sloganeers and luddites of public administration. So, you can see why Silas Loom might not have got into their scene. I imagine most of them have a more nuanced take on Brexit, even the ones who voted remain through gritted teeth and see the outcome as a car crash.
The only sensible terms available - to either side- are EEA/EFTA, BINO, or reversion to the status quo. EEA/EFTA is off-the-shelf, more or less. Incentives don't come into it. BINO would be a cordial negotiation, but would still require more than the twelve months remaining under A50 to negotiate. The only problem with reversion to the status quo is that it requires another referendum. Anything else wouldn't be sensible, it's in the realm of cake.
Can we keep Brexit shit to the Brexit process thread?
'the UK' is the problematic bit of that. Unless there's a GE (or another ref) with an unambiguous outcome the 52%, and those of us in the 48% who respect the result, might have some slight objection.
In any event I'd suggest Brexit is more likely to break either or both of the political parties than the parties are likely to break Brexit by attempting to unilaterally withdraw A50.
Fair enough. Difficult to separate from analysis of what's happening with May, though. But I agree a general rant on the horror of it all is off topic.
Oh sure, all of that. I just found the discussion over which court would rule on it a bit pointless.
Rescindable letter of intent and the EU 27 game becomes make them rescind rather than come to terms... We had to go down the Art 50 route having signed up to it at Nice (wot no referendum) else we'd have been stuffed at UN arbitration, but we won't get a sensible deal til after it's 2 year period is over.
This is a thread of good cheer at May's misfortune.
pointless? discussion on urban????!? say it isn't so!!!
what are you doing on urban than, if you aren't keen on pointless discussion?
Surely GCHQ and the NSA are paying attention?
To the 'Theresa May's time is up' thread being derailed by a squabble over Brexit? I'd hazard a guess that they've got their manpower and algorithms focused elsewhere, but if someone is bored in their lunch break they might have a browse. Then again I didn't see the Clown Army as a likely target for state surveillance, so what do I know.
Damn. A life's work wasted.
Yep. I didn't vote either way, but it's hard to see brexit turning into lexit (to say the least). But the problem is, as you say, it's very difficult to imagine a configuration of forces within or across parties that will lead to halting the process.
It's very difficult to imagine any of the possible outcomes to all this actually happening, but one of them has to. I think cancelling Article 50 is actually fairly likely, no on the basis of how political interests might align, but because it's possible to arrive at a juncture where there are no other options. If the government remains unable to pick a basic model for Brexit, then we will end up in something like the final scene of Thelma and Louise. Except the acting won't be as good, and it will be real life, so the only thing you can realistically do is surrender.
I think that's the process, they will end up with an outcome because of the impossibility of other outcomes. However I think that outcome will be brexit.
Now she's fucked.
What's happened now?
She just let Peter Bone paint her into a corner. A very bad corner.
Mr Peter Bone (Wellingborough) (Con)
It has been assumed that triggering article 50 means that on 29 March 2019 we will come out of the EU if there is no agreement, but is it not the case that the negotiations can be extended if the Government and the EU agree to do that? Will the Prime Minister assure the House that under no circumstances will the negotiations be extended?
The Prime Minister
My hon. Friend is accurate in his interpretation of the treaty, which does allow for an extension of negotiations. I have been very clear that by March 2019 we want not only for those negotiation to have ended but to have an agreement on the future relationship and on our withdrawal, and we will leave the EU in March 2019.
Could there be anything good about a corner with Peter Bone in it?
not for that reason - if she says she'll extend the negotiating period (which isn't in her gift, the UK would have to propose it, and the commission and the other member states would have to agree, or not) she just says she's increasingly desperate for a deal, in which case the EU side have little reason to offer better terms.
The keg of high explosive powder.
Separate names with a comma.