Our system detected that your browser is blocking advertisements on our site. Please help support FoxesTalk by disabling any kind of ad blocker while browsing this site. Thank you.
Jump to content
smileysharad

Brexit!

Recommended Posts

8 hours ago, Legend_in_blue said:

I do wonder where they drum up these poll figures from.

 

We've got our esteemed brexit secretary Barclay not knowing what is in his bill today contradicting himself in his meeting.  Clueless.

 

We've got our esteemed chancellor not giving any analysis of the financial implications of this bill as the positives outweigh the negatives apparently.  That's ok then, we'll take your word for it.  Clueless.

 

Oh and let's dish this all out and have it through by Thursday in time for tea - Rees Smug.  Clueless.

 

There's not a chance this goes through.  Johnson will pull the plug.

Can I have 50/1 on it going through if it's got no chance? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

FWIW (probably not a lot :)), I really don’t believe Johnson wants a “no deal” Brexit. Why would any sane person want to preside over what is likely to be a very traumatic event of unknown length likely to inflict permanent economic and social damage? At best it would be a highly risky policy and he would have complete ownership.

 

In my view his strategy all along has been to bully both Parliament and the EU with the threat of no deal, basically the same as Theresa May tried towards the end, though he is obviously better at it.

 

As for his “deal”, he clearly deserves some credit (from Brexiteers) by getting the EU to reopen the Withdrawal Agreement when they said they wouldn’t, but this really shouldn’t be overstated. The deal he has stuck is very similar to what the EU offered at the start of negotiations (border down the Irish Sea), only for TM to reject it.

 

Any form of Brexit is at best a huge risk and more likely the beginning of a longer term decline in both world influence and economy, but at least it looks like “no deal” will be avoided. In the absence of significant support for a second referendum in the polls (say 60% plus), I have come to the conclusion that it’s probably best to end the damaging uncertainty and go with Johnson’s complicated and flawed deal. 

Edited by WigstonWanderer
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, WigstonWanderer said:

FWIW (probably not a lot :)), I really don’t believe Johnson wants a “no deal” Brexit. Why would any sane person want to preside over what is likely to be a very traumatic event of unknown length likely to inflict permanent economic and social damage? At best it would be a highly risky policy and he would have complete ownership.

 

In my view his strategy all along has been to bully both Parliament and the EU with the threat of no deal, basically the same as Theresa May tried towards the end, though he is obviously better at it.

 

As for his “deal”, he clearly deserves some credit (from Brexiteers) by getting the EU to reopen the Withdrawal Agreement when they said they wouldn’t, but this really shouldn’t be overstated. The deal he has stuck is very similar to what the EU offered at the start of negotiations (border down the Irish Sea), only for TM to reject it.

 

Any form of Brexit is at best a huge risk and more likely the beginning of a longer term decline in both world influence and economy, but at least it looks like “no deal” will be avoided. In the absence of significant support for a second referendum in the polls (say 60% plus), I have come to the conclusion that it’s probably best to end the damaging uncertainty and go with Johnson’s complicated and flawed deal. 

Because it doesn't affect them. Also, a lot of politicians bet against certain things in which case, the worse the economy, the more they beneift.

 

However, it doesn't seem to clear that this is the case. I think Johnson is in for the glory of getting the UK out and having his name against this historic event. After that he will vanish.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, WigstonWanderer said:

FWIW (probably not a lot :)), I really don’t believe Johnson wants a “no deal” Brexit. Why would any sane person want to preside over what is likely to be a very traumatic event of unknown length likely to inflict permanent economic and social damage? At best it would be a highly risky policy and he would have complete ownership.

 

In my view his strategy all along has been to bully both Parliament and the EU with the threat of no deal, basically the same as Theresa May tried towards the end, though he is obviously better at it.

 

As for his “deal”, he clearly deserves some credit (from Brexiteers) by getting the EU to reopen the Withdrawal Agreement when they said they wouldn’t, but this really shouldn’t be overstated. The deal he has stuck is very similar to what the EU offered at the start of negotiations (border down the Irish Sea), only for TM to reject it.

 

Any form of Brexit is at best a huge risk and more likely the beginning of a longer term decline in both world influence and economy, but at least it looks like “no deal” will be avoided. In the absence of significant support for a second referendum in the polls (say 60% plus), I have come to the conclusion that it’s probably best to end the damaging uncertainty and go with Johnson’s complicated and flawed deal. 

You do realise this is only the transition plan don't you?  The future trading relationship is still up for grabs.

I should also point out that the EU is declining in importance in the world, and we are in a great position to grow in importance.  You are so negative!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, KrefelderFox666 said:

Because it doesn't affect them. Also, a lot of politicians bet against certain things in which case, the worse the economy, the more they beneift.

 

However, it doesn't seem to clear that this is the case. I think Johnson is in for the glory of getting the UK out and having his name against this historic event. After that he will vanish.

You have been reading too many conspiracy theories.  Utter nonsense.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, Jon the Hat said:

You do realise this is only the transition plan don't you?  The future trading relationship is still up for grabs.

I should also point out that the EU is declining in importance in the world, and we are in a great position to grow in importance.  You are so negative!

An act of economic and social vandalism. What exactly is there to be positive about?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Reading this morning just how long the WA bill is.

 

115 pages, accompanied by 122 pages of notes and refers to the 575 page WA.

 

How. The. **** were MPs supposed to digest and table amendments within the space of 8pm last night and this morning? This will SHAPE THE FUTURE OF THE UK FOR DECADES, and Johnson expects them to turn it around in 12 hours like some first year student handing in a last minute essay. Sounds like taking back control to me.

 

This is what we get when we have someone in charge who has basically spent his entire professional career winging it.

 

Still, it's good that we spent months on Tory leadership and illegal prorogation.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, RoboFox said:

Reading this morning just how long the WA bill is.

 

115 pages, accompanied by 122 pages of notes and refers to the 575 page WA.

 

How. The. **** were MPs supposed to digest and table amendments within the space of 8pm last night and this morning? This will SHAPE THE FUTURE OF THE UK FOR DECADES, and Johnson expects them to turn it around in 12 hours like some first year student handing in a last minute essay. Sounds like taking back control to me.

 

This is what we get when we have someone in charge who has basically spent his entire professional career winging it.

 

Still, it's good that we spent months on Tory leadership and illegal prorogation.

The journalist on Sky News said he read it in four hours last night - maybe we just need better politicians? 

 

It makes me laugh to be honest - 99% of parliament have already decided how they'll vote and now they want extra time to decide. Some of the politicians saying they needs weeks to scrutinise it are even the same ones who were saying last week it's the same as May's lol

 

I do think he's going to have to extend though - he just again needs to make sure the public knows it's parliament/the opposition that had done it rather than him. 

 

(Prorogation cost us two days BTW all in and one of those days they all knocked off early as it was Friday)

Edited by MattP
Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, Leicester_Loyal said:

*Awaits new election polls*

 

:claudio:

Tories now having regular 10+ pts leads and that's still with Brexit Party in double figures.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Stephen Bush on key controversies in the WAB. Sounds seriously grim, if it goes through unamended - and no wonder that ERG types are now happy:

" 1) The clauses confirming the continued primacy of EU law during the transition period - there is a meaningless section later down the bill designed to mollify any worried Brexiteers but it does not change the meaning of this part. However, if I were them I'd grin and bear it because....

2) There is nothing of substance in this bill to allow MPs to prevent a no-deal exit at the end of October 2020 and as written it does an excellent job of making the parliamentary manoeuvres that prevented a no-deal exit in March and October signficantly harder.  Coupled to pre-existing mechanisms in the transition period agreed by Theresa May, to stop a no-deal exit at the end of next year, the UK would have to agree an extension with the EU in July 2020 - and, because the EU enters a new budgetary period at the end of 2020, that would involve a huge financial commitment, something that Parliament cannot do without the co-operation of the executive

3) The scant ability given to Parliament to scrutinise the free trade agreement negotiations. Ministers will be required to provide updates to Parliament, but that's it. Given the difficulty of of preventing a no deal Brexit, as it stands, if MPs vote this through unamended this will be the last meaningful vote they cast as far as the final shape of Brexit is concerned - it will be a choice between whatever Johnson negotiates or no deal

4) The attempt to codify parts of the future declaration - the non-binding parts of the exit deal that cover the EU and UK's aspirations for the future relationship - which would put the UK on course for a low-alignment, low-trade, high regulatory divergence Brexit as envisaged by the Conservative party's most committed Brexiteers. (See? I said there was a good reason to just grin and bear the sections about the primacy of EU law during the transition.) 

 

However, Bush then speculates that Labour rebels might still support the bill because "these items of the bill, particularly that last part about enshrining the future relationship into law, look designed to produce a confrontation with Parliament. Despite having got a deal, the government looks like it is still desperately seeking dissolution-by-Parliament so that it can fight the 'Save Brexit' election it craves. Labour MPs might yet decide that denying them that is a price worth paying for voting through a very hard Brexit".

  • Sad 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, MattP said:

The journalist on Sky News said he read it in four hours last night - maybe we just need better politicians? 

 

It makes me laugh to be honest - 99% of parliament have already decided how they'll vote and now they want extra time to decide. Some of the politicians saying they needs weeks to scrutinise it are even the same ones who were saying last week it's the same as May's lol

 

I do think he's going to have to extend though - he just again needs to make sure the public knows it's parliament/the opposition that had done it rather than him. 

 

(Prorogation cost us two days BTW all in and one of those days they all knocked off early as it was Friday)

It's not just a question of reading it.  They have to understand the implications and spot the problems.  It's being deliberately rushed through with inadequate information (e.g. no impact assessment) to undermine scrutiny.  Yesterday showed that not even the Brexit secretary understands it properly.  

 

The politicians who are complaining don't think it's the same as May's deal.  They think it's even worse.  

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Winchesterfox said:

It's not just a question of reading it.  They have to understand the implications and spot the problems.  It's being deliberately rushed through with inadequate information (e.g. no impact assessment) to undermine scrutiny.  Yesterday showed that not even the Brexit secretary understands it properly.  

 

The politicians who are complaining don't think it's the same as May's deal.  They think it's even worse.  

And if it's even worse they can vote against it. 

 

I'm just finding this absolutely ludicrous, Jeremy Corbyn announced on Saturday this is a bad deal and he'll vote against it, saying three days later he now needs more time to analyse it is laughable.

Edited by MattP
Link to comment
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, MattP said:

And if it's even worse they can vote against it. 

 

I'm just finding this absolutely ludicrous, Jeremy Corbyn announced on Saturday this is a bad deal and he'll vote against it, saying three days later he now needs more time to analyse it is laughable.

It's not just about whether they vote for or against it.  They also have to think about how it could be amended so they could accept it. And to do that they have to understand the detail. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Peter Oborne pulling no punches...

 

Quote

It’s a classic case of what Johnson once called “having our cake and eating it”. This means that the British media are not just failing to hold him to account. They are not even trying. They are behaving as cheerleaders to the government. They are allowing the prime minister to get away with lies and dishonesty which they would never have permitted to his predecessor, Theresa May, let alone Jeremy Corbyn.

Part of this is paying a price for access. Much is sheer laziness. Broadcasters don’t bother to confront Johnson when he utters lies and falsehoods

 

https://www.opendemocracy.net/en/opendemocracyuk/british-journalists-have-become-part-of-johnsons-fake-news-machine/

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

50 minutes ago, Leicester_Loyal said:

That's some margin! Cheers Matt.

Bigger the most, but virtually ALL polling now is showing numbers that deliver Boris a majority.

 

 

IMG_20191022_141201.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, MattP said:

Boris confirms he'll withdraw deal if timetable not voted on and call a GE.

 

Has he confirmed that himself? There were rumours of that - and I see Kuenssberg is reporting a "No. 10 source" (Cummings?) saying that......see @Voll Blau's post above of Oborne's article re. govt abuse of media....

 

BBC News said that it looked as if he'd win the second reading vote on the bill, but lose the vote on the timetable.

 

These comments from No. 10 might just be heavy pressure in an attempt to turn round the expected defeat on the timetable.

 

If not, and he responds to winning a vote on his legislation & losing a vote trying to impose a 3-day limit on complex legislation that is arguably the most important in living memory is to pull his legislation & seek an election, this shows 2 things.....

1) He is more interested in securing unfettered power via a toxic, divisive election than he is in Brexit

2) He holds democracy in complete and utter contempt and is prepared to trash it - even risking a Brexit Deal he's apparently on course to pass in his crazed pursuit of power & unwillingness to accept democratic scrutiny....

 

But I think we already knew those 2 things, didn't we? :whistle:

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, MattP said:

Last thing he said in his closing speech unless I dreamt it!

 

Seems he hinted strongly at it, without actually saying it.....

 

Guardian live:

Government to pull Brexit bill if timetable is not agreed

David Linden, SNP MP for Glasgow East, asks the prime minister about reports on twitter (see below), that the government with pull the withdrawal bill if the programme motion is not passed.

Johnson says:

I will in no way allow months more of this. If parliament refuses to allow Brexit to happen and instead gets its way and decided to delay everything until January or possibly longer, in those circumstances [the government cannot] continue with this ... I must say that the bill will have to be pulled and we will have to go forward to a general election. I will argue at that election: ‘let’s get Brexit done’. And the leader of the opposition will make his case to spend 2020 having two referendums – one on Brexit and one on Scotland...

Mr Speaker, there is another path. That is to accept, as I have done, that this deal does not give us everything that we want. And all of us can find clauses and provisions to which we can [object], as we can in any compromise. But it also gives us the opportunity to conclude that there is no dishonour in setting aside the entirely legitimate desire to deliver the perfect deal in the interest of seizing the great deal that is now within our grasp.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...