Brexit: Theresa May's deal is voted down

Cool, but that isn't even slightly related to the subject under debate. Maybe next time you'll try to stick to the thread subject rather than trying to hijack the thread with your personal conspiracy recollections.

 

I have to say Cerb that I'm absolutely fuming with our Parliamentarians who have decided to ignore the result of the biggest Referendum in British history and call for a second referendum. Perhaps all voters should call for a second general election vote when it doesn't go their way?

What they're counting on, of course, is that there's been approx 1.5 million deaths of old codgers - largely seen as favouring Brexit since the Referendum and a million plus new young voters - considered to be Remainers -have come onto the electoral roll - and they think that'll change the result. It might well too. But it's a complete travesty of our democratic system.

The danger is they go ahead is that they might well reap a whirlwind.

 

Bloody hell SH, I hadn't thought of that. And I certainly agree that if there's any fudging or even a whiff of deception, there's going to be blood on our streets. What a ****ing unholy imbroglio by a bunch of scheming chancers and losers.

 

You feel the British public isn't being manipulated by the media and members of the government? Then I stand corrected.

 

I noticed last night a Brit saying that they believed they had what they needed to get May's deal through. The French woman she was talking to said, well it all sounded good but she felt it might not be as easy as she thought. Today, Junker has apparently told May that being permanently in the Customs Union is the price which will need to be paid for revising the backstop.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/jan/26/juncker-may-backstop-eu-customs-union

While this seems like what one would expect in negotiations, the EU seeing that it has the opportunity to push a bit more, I cannot see the No Dealers agreeing. I would have thought we would be better in a Norway plus than this. Comments?

 

It's for countries with reciprocal healthcare arrangements. It applies to the EU but is not restricted to the EU.

No it isn't, it's more expensive than publicly funded single-payer and more importantly in this case, the elderly living abroad wouldn't get any kind of reduction in taxes and so forth, so any healthcare costs would be in addition to their current outgoings.

It's a sustainable programme. It will come under strain if a couple of million high-need consumers suddenly appear.

There's a difference between thriving and surviving. Even if a hard Brexit were only to cost us 1% of GDP growth annually (most forecasts put it far higher) then that's 25% over 20 years compounded. That's the difference between being level with Germany and slipping back to join Southern Europe

 

Obviously this is yet another attempt to hijack and deflect the thread - just like your earlier one above introducing the 1970's global overpopulation conspiracy theory.

 

Yep. Which is why the May government now has plans for Martial Law. Apparently this is for a "no deal Brexit" according to all the newspapers. But that has to be completely back to front doesn't it? If Brexit is sabotaged by these greedy self-serving bastards in Parliament then, as you say, there will be blood in the street and that's what the government is planning Martial Law for surely.

Someone should start a nationwide campaign calling for every MP that wants a second referendum - and those who ignore the vote of their Constituents, to stand for re-election immediately. Then we'll see where their true loyalties lie.

 

Exactly what I thought (great minds think alike?? ). It's obviously to spin against the no-deal then put the blame on Farage, Jacob R-Mogg et al when (not 'if') the **** hits the fan. And to think it could have been all over 3 or 4 weeks after Article 50. The dreadful woman is a remainer, and as we know, once a remainer, always a remainer?

No matter how hard I try and type remainer it always comes out as 'remainder' lol

 

Classic Juncker brinkmanship. When he's not royally pissed out of his head bitching slapping and engaging in hos hobby of tie comparisons anyway:



This man needs to be watched very closely. When he was the Prime Minister of Luxembourg he had to resign when news of his involvement in the domestic terrorist Gladio network's "Bommeleeer affair" (20 plus bombings in Luxembourg aimed at causing a strategy of tension to enable Juncker government to invoke a right-wing defence policy) was made public (HERE).

But to answer your question I do think that a reasonable and mutually beneficial deal should be reached and can be reached if both sides stop playing ideological silly buggers and acting like children.

 

Makes perfect sense they should have to stand for re-election if they desire to ignore the exit vote and demand a second. The will of the people may have changed since their election after all...and of course some of those who voted for them previously may have passed on so their vote should of course be nullified...apply the same logic that they are when suggesting a new exit vote and no reason they should not stand for re-election..

 

I know it's irrational but I can't look at a pic of Tusk without a feeling of profound loathing. And I'll leave a certain Nigel Farage to sum up Juncker - he can do it much better than I can.

 

For the life of me, I cannot fathom why people in the UK want to leave the EU. As I listen to typical Brexit voters on British media, I come to believe that they truly don't know why either. It was a mistake of stupendous consequences for Cameron to hold a referendum. I predict a very, very hard Brexit followed by another referendum that results in a remain vote and a sobbing future leader going to Brussels to ask forgiveness and a do over.

 

There are people in our country living in areas which have been neglected for a long time who have suffered massively from the Governments austerity measures who thought they would just tell Cameron what they thought of him.

My daughter was telling me the other day she had heard Varoufakis saying what we should do is accept the deal that no one likes for now and then try and get back in. That is his opinion. It looks like that is not going to work. May I think wants to go back to Europe and say an amendment on Backstop and they will probably not agree (that is to keep the border open in Ireland and hopefully peace as well.) It looks like it will be a No Deal or possibly No Brexit as No Deal is expected by the Government to be so bad it will need Marshall Law and there is absolutely no guarantee of any recovery.

 

Exactly. As usual, unpopular policies were blamed on the EU and the effects of those policies were blamed on immigrants.

Here in South Wales there was a big majority in favour of "Leave" despite their being comparatively few EU immigrants and despite the area benefiting significantly from EU investment. It's no coincidence that the South Wales valleys have been particularly badly hit since 2008 and while some parts of the country (notably London and South East) have bounced back pretty well, local services and charities in this area are stretched to breaking.

My view is that a no-deal Brexit is inevitable because it's the default and there isn't a single viable* course of action that can get 50% support either in Parliament or in the country.

I don't think that there will be a need for marshal law in the event of a no-deal Brexit because I don't think the consequences will be utterly dire - things will just be a quite a bit worse than they otherwise would have been in perpetuity.

* - I say viable because there would likely be support for "all the benefits of EU membership but none of the responsibilities" but that isn't going to happen in this or any other universe.

 

The North East had and is having it bad as well and voted for Brexit.

I heard Osbourne talking about it and he seemed to think there was a decent possibility that some Tories would move with Labour to get an election. He also seemed to think No Brexit was a possibility due to some Tories not wanting to put us through No Deal though I am also thinking that looks like the outcome.

I just can't imagine everything suddenly stopping and trade deals vanishing with no replacements made and even here with the expected empty shelves and higher prices it is those who have the least who will be the most affected by the higher prices and coming out with the situation like this has to be the Governments responsibility. Those who voted for Brexit did not vote for that. May wanted to bring in the army in the riots in 2011. The army said No so it may be part of her psychology and it may still be part of that of the Army to say No. I know Scottish police were complaining about the extra level they were being asked to provide when no money was going to come from Westminster to fund this.

and May saying Brexit must go through for social cohesion and believing she might need to bring in Marshal Law to deal with the effects of Brexit seems a bit of an oxymoron.

Indeed. I think it is the biggest Government mess I have ever seen. Some people are claiming the worst mistake since Suez.

 

Maybe they will, maybe they won't - as I keep saying, nobody knows because we've never been here before. But even if they are worse in the transition, there are plenty of markets out there, but if there's no demand in them for whatever it is you make, well that's life . . . winners, and losers??

 

Yep, looks like the same kind of profile - old heavy industries, replaced by service industries thanks to government grant and so forth, which haven't recovered post-2008.

I think George Osborne is out of touch. It is conceivable that both Labour and Conservative remainers could cooperate and put together an amendment to delay or abandon Brexit. The trouble is that any such amendment is almost certain to fail because it will be opposed by the leadership of both parties.

IMO no-deal is inevitable because it is the default and parliament cannot get 50% support for anything. If delaying Brexit were the default then I'd say that was inevitable.

Well that's what will happen in the event of a no-deal Brexit, the default outcome. The UK would be relying on the good will of trading partners to have anything else.

Any and all blame will be seamlessly passed from the government to the EU in the same way that the EU has been blamed for every unpopular government policy for the last three or four decades. I think that a large proportion of the UK population will believe them, the "Blitz spirit" will be invoked and the government will become incredibly popular for managing us through our darkest hour - even though it's their fault. Remainers and foreigners will be reviled and cast as traitors.

 

Jeez what a moaning minnie you are!

 

There are plenty of markets out there but as yet there is no indication about what the terms of doing business may be with those markets post-Brexit.

 

Realism hurts I guess when you're living in cloud cuckooland

 

Newsnight was interesting last night suggesting a Corbyn might be needed! It looks like in England it may be a possibility of that or a move to the extreme right.

In Scotland it won't be that. It will be about Independence and if this is going to create a hard border in Ireland ...…………...

 

Yea, loads of commonwealth country's markets like the powerhouses of Kiribati, the Fiji Islands and Nauru.