Brexit: A change of heart??

Currently halfway through Jonathan Coe's latest book, Middle England, which can be seen as Rotter's Club Chapter three.

Edited by Sean Trane - March 07 2019 at 01:39

Man With Hat wrote: If I lived in the UK I would have voted remain.

jamesbaldwin wrote: Man With Hat wrote: If I lived in the UK I would have voted remain.  I knew that in urban areas, staying in the EU prevailed. In rural areas with many immigrants, leaving the EU prevailed.

yeah.... I can see that happening as well..  zero good choices but that is what happens when you jump off a cliff without a parachute.. or any kind of plan.  Bad endings almost always the result

Edited by micky - March 13 2019 at 18:49

I think I'm past caring now. There isn't anything any of us can do, so why bother losing any sleep.

I suspect we'll get a short extension, but for what??? Any deal our PM tables will be rejected purely because it's her deal. Brexit die hards in her own party will want to make no concessions to the EU, and even if the Labour party agreed with every single item within it, they would still vote it down on principle. This is the problem, it's a party political issue, not one of national interest.

What should have happened is that May should have assembled a cross party Brexit committee to decide what was in the best interests of the country. This would have separated those MP's who genuinely had the country's best interests at heart, and those who only wanted to serve themselves or their party, and they could have been measured and judged accordingly in the media. As it is, the government and opposition are still fighting for control of the steering wheel, even as the bus goes over the cliff. That's how pathetic and self serving this revolting class of sh*theads really are. They are a waste of skin, and I wouldn't be surprised if the EU discarded us, as if removing a tick from a cats ear.

Edited by Blacksword - March 14 2019 at 02:24

ExittheLemming wrote: Does anyone hold out any faith that the UK can maybe broker a last ditch deal similar to that of the EEA member countries Iceland, Liechstenstein and Norway who have access to the single market albeit without any say in EU policy. They would of course have to agree to the free movement of labour but wouldn't be subject to the legislation covering Common Agricultural Policy or Common Fisheries Policy. Wouldn't this be better than the nightmare 'no deal' scenario?

That won't happen IMO.

Putting a stop to freedom of movement was a main motivation for many leave voters for a start, and hardline Brexiteers within the government would reject this, as it would be seen as capitulation to Europe. I don't think the "Norway" option was ever even considered.

It's a shame, because I think it would obviously be preferable to no deal, which I think would be a complete disaster.

"Like the passengers of the Titanic voting for the iceberg to move" was how one European minister put it.

An extension now looks inevitable, and the Germans, who hold all the power, want a long one.

MPs will vote to extend the article 50 process today, but then expect the EU to lay down hard terms for an extension.

Expect a two year extension to be demanded, plus, possibly, a second UK referendum.

The EU holds all the cards now. The only interesting question is whether one of the 27 will refuse to agree to an extension.

Then we really are in the sh*t!

micky wrote: yeah.... I can see that happening as well..  zero good choices but that is what happens when you jump off a cliff without a parachute.. or any kind of plan.  Bad endings almost always the result 3 choices...  revoke and risk the electorate but don't see the votes even being close to being there for that anyway..  pass the damn agreement (which means labor will have to in part vote for it) .. or do exactly what the meaningless vote today was about.. leaving without a deal. Meaningless in that 'no deal' is not completely in their hands.. they are bound by the law to leave by a certain date...deal or not... now either they revoke or pass the agreement.  Assuming the 291 represent the max of stupidity in the House of Commons..  hopefully for all that isn't the fall back which means.. really.. the only choice is indeed to pass the agreement which is why I guess May is proposing only asking for a week extension...  I haven't figured out if she is a f**king good poker player.. but I have my suspicions.. speaking of... I'm more suprised.. though I suppose one shouldn't be that the vote was as close as it was.

Chaser wrote: The only interesting question is whether one of the 27 will refuse to agree to an extension. Then we really are in the sh*t!

What was hilarious about last night's farce was seeing the Prime Minister voting against her own motion! The Tory whips told MPs to vote for it and then, an hour later when the amendment surprisingly passed, the whips told MPs to vote against the government's own motion. You couldn't make it up.

A few posters here have mentioned the Norway option.

The Norway option has been looked at before and it just won't work for the UK.

For a start it would have to be Norway+ which means staying in the customs union (because of the Irish border issue)

That makes it the same as our current arrangement but without any voting rights. In other words it's completely pointless.

In addition the assumption that the UK can just decide to rejoin EFTA is wrong. EFTA would have to agree to it and there are good reasons to believe that they would not agree.

The UK would upset the balance of EFTA, who are concerned that the UK would use EFTA as a stepping stone to a full exit of the EU.

In addition, the EFTA countries have an equal say on trade deals. That means that Lichtenstein, with a population of 60,000 could block the UK from getting a trade deal with a major country like the USA. How long is that arrangement likely to last? Not long I suspect.

The Norway option and EFTA are red herrings and won't get us out of the mess.