Does the UK face a No Deal Brexit?

  • All the MPs from English regions outside London and liberal areas like Brighton, Cambridge etc, need to remember that the majority of their constituents voted to leave.


    If the MPs do against the wishes of this country, then calling them idiots would be the most kind term for them. Dead meat would be enough.

    If my post is in this colour, it is a moderator decision. Please abide by it.

  • One of the things that Davis and Baker said in their evidence to those select committees, was that there are three hundred separate projects ongoing all related to a no-deal Brexit. So, in that sense, we are being serious about a no deal, just not making much noise about it.


    And on that last link, I think its absolutely right we should lower our taxes if we so choose to do so. Something the EU is genuinely terrified of.

    If my post is in this colour, it is a moderator decision. Please abide by it.

  • I've far more important things to worry about than Brexit, so no, certainly not panicking over Brexit.

    If my post is in this colour, it is a moderator decision. Please abide by it.

  • This is what Southern Ireland did and has prospered greatly from investment from outside the EU. The EU is very twitchy about this because they know it is cost-effective in building a successful economy.


    I hope the Express is right in claiming Britain plans to do the same


    The Express is so solidly Brexit that they are prepared to exaggerate madly.

    Now called casablanca.

  • Brexit: Rule out no-deal, Jeremy Corbyn tells Theresa May

    Brexit: Ministers back my plan to block no-deal - Nick Boles

    There seems to have been a concerted effect today not just from Corbyn, Sturgeon and the usual suspects, but several conservative MPs too to try and block a no deal Brexit by trying to get a "no deal law passed. As the EU has refused renegotiation of the withdrawal agreement, where are they are going with this?

    No deal is a default position. You cannot legislate against the existence of a default. We either (a) remain as is or (b) leave with a deal or (c) neither (a) nor (b). which means Leave without a deal.


    Knowing that Option (b) is for the EU, not us, to decide, and that the EU will only permitted an version of option (b) that is unacceptable to us, this means that if we legislate to remove option (c), all that is left is to Remain. There becomes no other option. If that happens there will be rioting in the streets. We might also find we have got sucked into a politically- and economically- disintegrating Europe.

    Now called casablanca.

  • No deal is a default position. You cannot legislate against the existence of a default. We either (a) remain as is or (b) leave with a deal or (c) neither (a) nor (b). which means Leave without a deal.

    But our domestic legislation is separate from international treaties. If we ask the EU for a extension to article 50 and its granted, how can that possibly work if our own legislation has repealed the original 1972 act which took us into the EEC to begin with?

    If my post is in this colour, it is a moderator decision. Please abide by it.

  • But our domestic legislation is separate from international treaties. If we ask the EU for a extension to article 50 and its granted, how can that possibly work if our own legislation has repealed the original 1972 act which took us into the EEC to begin with?

    Because the sneaky shits we call politicians will find some way to ignore it where there's a will there's a way. ;)

    Young boys in the park jumpers for goalpost that's what footballs all about isn't it.

  • I hope not Ron and speaking of those sneaky persons, it looks like we're in for a interesting few days:



    Brexit talks are at a "crucial stage", Theresa May will tell MPs later when she updates them on the negotiations.

    The PM will say "we now all need to hold our nerve" to get the changes needed to get her Brexit deal through Parliament by the 29 March deadline.

    She has been trying to secure changes to the backstop arrangement - the "insurance" policy to avoid a return to border checks on the island of Ireland.

    The EU has reiterated it will not renegotiate the withdrawal agreement.

    I hope the EU sticks to its guns, doesn't renegotiate and the deal collapses, thus allowing us a clean break from the EU, but May is not giving up on "her" deal, is she? Lets see what she says later to parliament.

    If my post is in this colour, it is a moderator decision. Please abide by it.

  • But our domestic legislation is separate from international treaties. If we ask the EU for a extension to article 50 and its granted, how can that possibly work if our own legislation has repealed the original 1972 act which took us into the EEC to begin with?

    I don't know the answer to your question. I don't even understand its relevance to the point I was making, which was that removing a default outcome (Brexit no deal) is illogical, because you're left with a choice between Remaining and a Brexit deal that the EU has dismissed, which means that there is no choice but to Remain. Or, if you like, your choice is to "Do Nothing" or to, um, "Do Nothing"

    Now called casablanca.

  • May is not giving up on "her" deal, is she? Lets see what she says later to parliament.

    The only ray of hope is that I see in today's newspapers that the Iranians' street mob chants have now added to their long list of politicians "death to May"

    Now called casablanca.

  • Brexit: Theresa May promises meaningful vote after more talks with EU

    Theresa May has promised MPs a final, decisive vote on her Brexit deal with the EU - but not until she has secured changes to the Irish backstop clause.


    The PM said she needed "some time" to get the changes she believes MPs want.

    She promised to update MPs again on 26 February and, if she had not got a new deal by then, to give them a say on the next steps in non-binding votes.

    This is what happened yesterday, or what didn't happen as seems to be the case.


    We've already had the meaningful vote on the deal, so I don't know why May is calling her next vote a meaningful one too.


    At the moment the EU is not budging on reopening talks, so looks like we're getting closer to a no-deal.

    If my post is in this colour, it is a moderator decision. Please abide by it.

  • I may have misunderstood the motion being put forward by the government today, but it appears that they are endorsing the view that a no-deal should be prevented.


    Here is the explanation:

    Row brewing over Thursday’s Government motion opposing a no-deal Brexit


    If I have understood it correctly, then it's game over! No Brexit. It's either May's (the EU's) deal, which is worse than Remain, or Remain!

  • I think that article is wrong. The commons did not vote for a no-deal Brexit on the 29th, in fact it was specifically voted down. I hope...

    If my post is in this colour, it is a moderator decision. Please abide by it.

  • This is a new motion, Horizon, being put forward by the government, not Labour MP's. It's supposed to be voted on tomorrow, so we should find out fairly soon.

  • Rhetorical question: what is the difference between Britain and Venezuela other than Venezuela being further along a continuum towards dissolution and total collapse?


    Both countries have an increasing number of citizens who are divided in which government or leader or policy to support or be cowered or subdued into helpless acquiescence.


    Both countries have angry or desperate citizens who congregate, demonstrate or argue among themselves, either in the streets or on-line in social media or forums.


    Both countries have a widening gulf between wealthy or comfortably-off citizens and those hungry and destitute, which is causing civil unrest, violence and a breakdown in law & order.


    Both countries have a currency that is steadily declining in purchase value


    Both countries have realisable assets that could bring about a recovery in prosperity if it wasn't for the presiding leader or gang that is incompetent, insane, corrupt or wedded to an oppressive ideology, any and all of which lead, by intent or default, to looting the country for personal gain and a pleasurable lifestyle.


    Both countries have an elected leader who does what he or she wants and is able to manipulate tedious near-unfathomable statutes & procedures into a facade of democracy


    Both countries have a government assembly of useless pontificating puppets (or ex-firebrands reduced to supplicants)


    Both countries have an increasing number of citizens who, in order to survive, wish they could be someplace else. But the comfortably off can't sell up when no one wants or can afford to buy to buy, while the destitute can't gain entry to those countries that are better off and want to stay that way by not supporting bedraggled penniless refugees.


    Both countries are (soon to be) at a stage where incoming economic migrants are the least of their problems. Who in their right mind wants to migrate to a land of losers?

    Now called casablanca.

    Edited 2 times, last by Rob Alka ().

  • This is a new motion, Horizon, being put forward by the government, not Labour MP's. It's supposed to be voted on tomorrow, so we should find out fairly soon.

    Thanks Fidget.


    I really wanted to follow the final stages of Brexit closely, but my caring duties give me little free time, so really appreciate you keeping things updated here.:thumbup::)


    What can be said? May is making a monumental mistake. I don't believe Rees-Mogg, Boris et all, will do anything, unless they walk out of parliament. As it stands, they don't have the numbers to vote down the motion, assuming Labour MPs go along with May.


    A utter disgrace.:cursing::thumbdown:

    If my post is in this colour, it is a moderator decision. Please abide by it.

  • Rhetorical question: what is the difference between Britain and Venezuela other than Venezuela being further along a continuum towards dissolution and total collapse?

    We're nothing like Venezuela. They have a long history of instability, we don't.


    The problem we (the people) have is that our leaders believe they are doing what is correct for the UK in trying to keep us in the EU, and there are many arguments for doing so with emerging powers like China stretching its tentacles all over the world.

    If my post is in this colour, it is a moderator decision. Please abide by it.

  • 1 We're nothing like Venezuela. They have a long history of instability, we don't.


    2 The problem we (the people) have is that our leaders believe they are doing what is correct for the UK in trying to keep us in the EU,


    3 and there are many arguments for doing so with emerging powers like China stretching its tentacles all over the world.

    1 I agree the timeline is different. But I still fear we're on the same path of ruination. And the temperament North and South of the equator is different which might just mean that we will queue in a more orderly fashion at the food bank.


    2 All the rotten governments believe what they're doing is good for the UK. Hitler, Stalin, Mao, etc believe what they're doing is good for the country, good for its people. Either they're kidding themselves or they're kidding you or you're kidding yourself.


    3 I'm all for solidarity. What better example can there be than a continent comprising nation states with more similarities than differences, or at least open to cultural and commercial exchange , who will unite - or at least get into a state of preparedness - against an actual or potential external hazard (be it China, Russia, Iran, etc)? But that is - or was - Europe, not the EU. I see no justification for turning that once great continent into a single federalised centrally-controlled superstate that, deliberately - or by lack of vision or sensitivity - snuffs out the very substance that previously enabled individual autonomous states to unite within themselves and alongside like-minded neighbour states against a common external enemy. Indeed, I consider the EU "project" to be contra-indicated. It is one thing for a citizen to be a one-in-sixty-millionth of a nonentity but quite another to feel one-in-three hundred millionth of a non-entity. The EU Project is a Tower of Babel hierarchy of people with different political and cultural languages and cultures who, being vertically separated, cannot find common ground, leaving those in control at the top of an ivory tower that is bound to topple. The Babel Tower and the EU both tried to usurp the transcendent.


    Having said all that, I don't think it makes much difference whether we're in or out of the EU, wholly or partially. Britain's bigger problem is that it has become ungovernable and we are heading downwards and are increasingly punching below our weight.

    Now called casablanca.

    Edited once, last by Rob Alka ().

  • Shit.:cursing:


    The MPs rejected a no deal Brexit at any time by only a few votes. 312 v 308.


    Talk about bargaining away your biggest chip. Who would do that in business? No business person would say we would never walk away from a deal. That option should always be on the table, but not in this case!


    If the MPs now change the Withdrawal Act, they should be crucified.

    If my post is in this colour, it is a moderator decision. Please abide by it.

  • Isn't this only advisory? Still a close result.

    History is much like an Endless Waltz. The three beats of war, peace and revolution continue on forever.

    4312-gwban-gif

    If my post is in this colour  it is moderation. Take note.

  • Isn't this only advisory? Still a close result.

    Yep. For now. I don't trust them.


    What we need now is the EU to say no to an extension of Article 50. Monsieur Macron, Irish PM, do your stuff. Throw the spanner in, please.

    If my post is in this colour, it is a moderator decision. Please abide by it.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member to leave a comment.