The Forum Site - Join the conversation
Forums:
Politics

Brexit

Reply to Topic
AuthorMessage
Pages: << · 1 2 3 ...13 14 15 16 17 ...73 74 75 · >>
Jennifer1984 On July 20, 2022
Returner and proud





Penzance, United Kingdom
#211New Post! Oct 14, 2019 @ 15:13:20
Meanwhile........ the news of the day is the Queen's Speech and the elephant in the room that is the Brexiter plan to turn UK into an offshore tax haven for multinational corporations as is already being evidenced by things such as Facebook recently paying only £28 million of UK tax despite £1.7 billion in revenue.

Google, Amazon, Starbucks and many others have similarly dodged the taxman to the tune of billions of pounds.

Nothing of that in the Queens' speech today, but plenty on violent offenders, deporting those pesky foreigners and attempts to disenfranchise voters through an unnecessary photo ID system.

Boris knows his audience for sure.

We have to remember that the business side of Brexit (as separate from the political objectives) was to dodge the EU moves to close tax loopholes that allowed businesses like Facebook to operate within Europe and avoid large tax bills. With UK out of the EU they wouldn't have to worry about that.

Defeating Brexit is a long way from a done deal yet. There is much to be done.

We will be going to London to visit my family this weekend and Amanda and I will be marching.

The People's March 19 October - March Together For The Final Say

Mum and dad will be looking after Meg and if I know my daughter she'll have grandpa round her little finger in no time (he loves it).

This march may even be as big as the last one.

The only thing for certain is that it won't degenerate into fighting in Whitehall and mobs of Brexiters trampling all over poppy wreaths laid at the Cenotaph.

Strange isn't it, how nobody on this forum - who can usually be counted on to toady to the armed forces - condemned that. But I suppose it's alright when Brexiters do it.

The remain march will pass off peacefully and good naturedley, as all the other remain marches have done despite the huge numbers involved.

The EU summit takes place soon and that will be the last chance for Johnson to get his deal before 31 October...... and the possible implementation of the Benn Act.

It's getting more interesting by the day.
nooneinparticular On March 16, 2023




, Hawaii
#212New Post! Oct 15, 2019 @ 01:23:32
@shadowen Said

Only clearly it doesnt. All of the indications are that 'Project Fear' is continuing to fail but the overall remoaner plan is working well. The UK hasnt left the EU and it seems highly likely that the Government will be forced to go to the EU and ask for yet another extension. I'm tipping 6 months would be the min the Government would be forced to accept. Meanwhile the Zombie Parliament have the numbers to push through another referendum that this time around would deny the people the chance to simply leave the EU. There will be no in/out option. Instead it will be leave under May's awful deal or remain. So up to this point the remoaner plan is working very well.


This is the plan working well, is it? And if you think the Tory rebels and the part of Labour that actually supports leaving would ever support a referendum structured like that, I don't know what to tell you.

Quote:

Nope. The remoaners control the House so they are able to be pro-active. And they are working hand in glove with the EU so they know they will get as many delays as they need (provided they continue to control Parliament).


Only very clearly it's not. Look at how everything is playing out despite the apparent failure of "Project Fear". The Remoaners are in a very strong position at the moment and their overall plan is working quite well.


Either 'Project Fear' was necessary for the plan or it was superfluous. If it was superfluous then any discussion about it is likewise superfluous. If it was superfluous, then waiting 3 years for the public to change it's mind was pointless, and waiting an indefinite amount of time into the future is also pointless. The entire stated goal of 'Project Fear' according to this plan is to make the UK populace amenable to staying in the EU. If this is not needed, then why did the UK government, full of 'elites' and 'traitors' not simply ignore 'the will of the people' from the start and never invoke article 50 in the first place?

Quote:

You show me where I have said that it's ok for the UK to have min acceptable objectives but that it is not ok for the EU to do the same.


Oh so if you call the EU's minimal acceptable objectives selfish, that makes them no longer minimal acceptable objectives does it? Or the implication in multiple posts that because the EU is being selfish, it's largely their fault that negotiations are where they are? Even though the UK's own position has been just as, if not more, selfish in pursuit of it's own goals?

Quote:

Under Article 50 the default position is that the UK leaves the EU. That means leaving the customs union, leaving the single market etc etc etc. This is what the UK Government want. The EU however want N.I to remain indefinitely within their customs union, single market etc until they decide otherwise. In response the UK Government have made a major concession by offering to allow N.I to remain within the single market (and all that entails) for an indefinite period of time (set not by the EU but by the people of N.I). I really don't understand how this is anything other than a major concession to the EU. Telling N.I that they can't leave the EU when the rest of the UK does is hardly a concession to N.I.


Giving NI the ability to decide the borders is a concession to NI and only NI. This entire debacle at the border is entirely due to the GFA. The EU don't WANT to keep NI indefinitely in the EU. Especially if it's this difficult to do so in the first place. NI itself is not worth that much hassle. The EU WANT to not be subject to international repercussions from violating the GFA. They WANT to not have to worry about a porous border with a neighbor that may or may not flood it's own market with cheaply made product that doesn't meet their own standards of quality.

Keeping NI in the single market, from an EU perspective, is simply an ends to a means, nothing more.

Quote:

Flimsy logic. Really. No 10 report what Merkel said. Merkel doesnt deny it. No one in her Government deny it. But to you it's unreasonable to assume that what No 10 claim she said is in all likelihood what she did infact say.


Yes I do, because I learned a long time ago that people will believe whatever they wish at the end of the day, and they will do so regardless of any objections from either side.

Suppose that Merkel came out and said, 'no I never said such a thing'. Would you believe her? Would that denial even matter at all?

Quote:

Obviously any deal needs to be first accepted by both negotiating parties. The deal would then need to be passed by the UK Parliament and then by the EU Parliament. May's approach was to accept what the EU negotiators offered, knowing that the EU Parliament would likely pass the agreement, and hope she could somehow persuade the UK parliament to agree to the deal. Only she couldn't and they wouldnt. BJ has taken a different approach. Labour, the Lib Dems, SNP and Plaid Cymru (how dare they not give their party an English name) have all said they will NOT vote for ANY plan BJ comes up with. So in order to get any plan through Parliament BJ needs to come up with a plan that will be acceptable to the ERG and potential Labour 'rebels'. If the DUP can be brought on board so much the better. And so that's his starting point. TM showed it's a waste of time negotiating with the EU if you end up with a plan that has NO chance of passing through parliament. So it's not that BJ is proposing a plan he knows the EU will never accept, but more about proposing a plan he thinks has a chance of getting sufficient support in the HoC.

It is extremely difficult when you have two parties who want very different outcomes, and when you have to have 4 distinct groups all agreeing to the deal. Again, I hope a deal can be reached. One that the EU can live with and one that sees the UK actually leave the EU. Not partially leave, not take one step out but actually leave. Problem is I just dont see how such a deal will be agreed upon by all parties.


You just end up working the same problem from the opposite end. Whether you start a deal making process from Parliament or the EU, you still have to take into account the others stance. Yes, Theresa May showed that it was pointless negotiating with the EU if Parliament will never agree to it. Likewise, it is pointless to negotiate with Parliament if the EU will never accept it.

Quote:

May's deal was an absolute corker for the EU so it's no surprise they want to stick to it.


Fair enough


Sometimes they actually are relatively simple. Other times less so. In many cases it's simply the matter of filling out and lodging one extra form. Not the end of the world.


I would be incredibly surprised if this ends up being just 'one extra form'.

Quote:

HMG


And where is the data in Her Majesty's Government that shows this?

Quote:

Well we know depts like HM Revenue and Customs have received significant increases to their budget and have taken on extra staff.


I'd like to know how much they asked for to prepare. Governments the world over have a tendency when they increase budget to not give departments the sum they asked for to deal with problems. This typically results in poor or lacking services, despite the increase in budget.

Quote:

Really. So you think civil servants who havent even visited the offices of the Port of Calais know as much about it operations and contingency planning as those who actually run it. Are you serious? The Port of Calais is a huge business. They have a lot riding on their ability to efficiently cope with a no deal exit. They started serious planning straight after the results of the people's vote was announced back in 2016. They have stress tested their contingency plans both by using computers AND by using over 800 trucks. And they have done this multiple times. They have reported their results multiple times. But hey, if you think they dont know any more about how their Port is run (and how they will deal with a no deal scenario) than civil servants in Whitehall then fine.


Uhuh. Nonsensical, like trusting the knowledge and expertise of those running one of the world's biggest ports more than civil servants.



What is nonsensical is the failure of the reports authors to speak to those who run the PoCA and to visit same etc etc etc. The report runs for all of 5 pages and could have been written up in a couple of hours by a school kid.


The key here is 'reasonable'. If for example one of the key assumptions of a 'reasonable' worst case scenario involves a dramatic slow down at the PoC then you would hope that the authors were basing that assumption on information gathered after having actually visited to Port and spoken to the Authority re how the Port operates, what measures they had taken to min. any impact of no deal, what testing they had done to see that their measures are effective etc. And yet they did NONE of this and so their entire 'reasonable' worse case scenario is worthless. Might as well have got JS to write it over a caffè latte.


So, you think that the port authority at Calais understands and has accounted for logistical and oversight issues all across the UK and any other countries it plans to do business with in the assessment of the readiness of only their own port? Once it reaches a port of entry, that's not where all the problems end.

The report actually suggests that the delays will be caused largely by companies who are unprepared to deal with new customs checks and delays at foreign ports, and even lists the French as the primary perpetrator. So, once again, it doesn't really matter what the Port Authority at Calais says. They can't do anything about backlog if the cargo ship's destination is clogged, no matter how prepared they think they can make their own systems.

If such a reason is actually true, that could make both Calais' own reports AND that of Yellowhammers accurate. Yes, Calais could be ready for inflow and internal traffic concerns, but it doesn't inherently disprove the assertion that ports will be backlogged, especially if they might be backlogged at other foreign ports first and then the 'traffic jam' backs all the way into Calais or other ports as a consequence.
Jennifer1984 On July 20, 2022
Returner and proud





Penzance, United Kingdom
#213New Post! Oct 15, 2019 @ 08:47:26
I've just heard on Good Morning Britain (I know, I know) that Johnson and Foster have had talks overnight and there will apparently be further amendedments to the UK proposals currently being discussed in Brussels.

This is being interpreted here that a deal is possible this week and the Brexiter mood in UK is becoming much more upbeat. It's being talked about now as if the whole thing is as good as a done deal. Which it isn't.

It has to be said, that this is the closest anybody has come yet, but there are still obstacles in the way, notwithstanding that what is emerging is Theresa May's deal but with NI staying in within UK Customs arrangements.

Can this get through Parliament..? Well, that depends on Labour and other opposition parties. The fact is, though, that Brexiteers in Parliament are realising that whatever the “new deal” is, it is their last chance and it’s going to be as hard a Brexit as they're ever going to get.

We're finally reaching the only logical outcome for these negotiations (from a Tory perspective) - a N.I. only backstop and border in the Irish Sea. It's exactly what May would have gone with the in the first place had she not been dependent on DUP votes to stay in government. Boris knows that he's going to face a general election either way, so DUP support is largely unimportant as long as he can find enough MP's to support him elsewhere.

That's not to say that things aren't still very delicate with Tory right-wingers. Boris has to handle them carefully - but it's looking like they've also come round to the basic logic that once we leave the EU, we are out, and future arrangements can be negotiated down the line. If they continue to oppose deals for not being 'good enough' then they could face the very real threat of no Brexit at all.

The Labour 'rebels' MPs position is a bit more complex, but ultimately I just don't think they have faith in their party to win an election and take over the process. If they are desperate to take a Brexit deal (for whatever reason) this would be the only one on the table.

What i'm expecting at the moment is a provisional deal to be announced this week, with Boris accepting a one month extension to get everything over the line.

On the other hand:

Johnson's problem is that he needs considerably more than 10 MPs to make up the DUP lot. Losing the DUP's support will lose some ERG headbangers. To make up for DUP+ERG, he will need to find MPs elsewhere. There may be a dozen among the ex-Tory 21 but that's not enough. The list of Labour rebels is finite and not enough... so there is a requirement to soften the political declaration to pull over more "let's just get it done, but not at any cost" MPs but that in turn would lose more ERG MPs.

For several reasons he is in a better position than May (headbangers know he's the only option to get the hardest Brexit they can ever hope for) but the numbers are very tight and as it stands not enough to pass.

The numbers are definitely not there to waive the Benn Act requirements without a ratification Act having been passed into law first. That means extension (don't forget, the Benn Act already specifies that if agreement + ratification happen then the end of the extension date can be brought forward and the UK can leave), which in turn means ample opportunities for amendments. The more "soft amendments" there are, or heaven forbid (from the Brexiteer POV) a referendum amendment passes, the more headbanger votes will be lost.

This is still a confused and uncertain picture. No matter what the Brexit press and the BBC tell us, we still have no idea how this will pan out in the end.
shadowen On March 22, 2024




Bunyip Bend, Australia
#214New Post! Oct 15, 2019 @ 15:17:22
@nooneinparticular Said

...if you think the Tory rebels and the part of Labour that actually supports leaving would ever support a referendum structured like that, I don't know what to tell you.

Who thought over 20 Tories would cross the floor and join a rebel alliance that includes a Corbyn led Labour. The Lib Dems, SNP and Plaid Cymru are all determined to revoke article 50 at the first possible opportunity. It's clear a number of former Tory MP's (like Hammond and Grieve) are also set firmly against Brexit. Infact Hammond and Grieve said they only crossed the floor and supported the Benn Surrender Act to prevent a no deal exit and to encourage BJ to fully pursue a new deal. And yet here they are today, doing all they can to put the kybosh on any deal BJ might bring back. They are even committed to forcing an extension using the Benn Surrender Act even if Parliament were to pass BJ's deal. Bear in mind of course that the great majority of MP's are remainers (though not all are remoaners). Many would support Labour's referendum esp as remain would be almost certain to win as the Brexit Party, UKIP, ERG, DUP etc would never support May's deal. They would rather remain and start again in their efforts to get the UK out of the EU. So yes, I think there could be the numbers there to push through Labour's referendum. I'm not saying that this will happen, but it certainly could. I think it would be pretty tight one way or the other

@nooneinparticular Said

Either 'Project Fear' was necessary for the plan or it was superfluous.

Because remoaners are so sold on "Project Fear", because they find it so compelling, it has become an important part of their overall strategy. The problem is it just hasn't been very successful re getting neutral or leave supporters to back remain. And yet they continue to push it. Having said that, I suppose to some extent you could argue that "Project Fear" has had some form of qualified success in so far that it has been passionately embraced by remoaners. This in turn may have helped convince some of the former Tory MP's to cross the floor. That said I think it's more of an excuse for them to act as they did rather than a reason in and of itself. But ultimately that is speculation as unlike some people who discuss Brexit I don't claim to know what people are really thinking when they say and do different things.

@nooneinparticular Said

why did the UK government, full of 'elites' and 'traitors' not simply ignore 'the will of the people' from the start and never invoke article 50 in the first place?

Simple. To flat out ignore the result of the single largest democratic vote in the UK's history right off the bat would have cost the Government votes and power. Better to pretend to support the result of the people's vote whilst quietly working to try and ignore it through endless delays and obstruction dressed up as good will. It's only been since BJ became PM that the remoaner MP's have been forced to step out of the shadows and reveal their true intentions (eg Hammond and Grieve).

@nooneinparticular Said

Oh so if you call the EU's minimal acceptable objectives selfish, that makes them no longer minimal acceptable objectives does it? Or the implication in multiple posts that because the EU is being selfish, it's largely their fault that negotiations are where they are? Even though the UK's own position has been just as, if not more, selfish in pursuit of it's own goals?

1. You said "I don't understand how you can claim that the UK having minimum requirements for a deal is not duplicitous, but that the EU having the same is."

I replied with "You SHOW me where I have said that it's ok for the UK to have min acceptable objectives but that it is not ok for the EU to do the same."

You still havent done that. SHOW me where I have said as you claim.

What I have said however are things like:
"i dont think EITHER party issued any ultimatums"

"Personally I find the blame game pointless. It is entirely subjective and ultimately irrelevant"

2. You said: "Oh so if you call the EU's minimal acceptable objectives selfish, that makes them no longer minimal acceptable objectives does it?"

Where did I say this? Again, I have said that playing the blame game is pointless and subjective. You could argue that both sides are being 'selfish' is so far as they both want an outcome that is in their best interests. You however seem to imply that I believe that the EU are bad for insisting on min. objectives whilst BJ is good for doing the same thing. So SHOW me where I have said something along these lines. QUOTE me.

3. You said: "Or the implication in multiple posts that because the EU is being selfish, it's largely their fault that negotiations are where they are?"

So come on then, what are these multiple posts. You are claiming I hold a position that you never back up. QUOTE me. I'm not like someone else who sees everything in black and white. BJ bad, EU good. A variation of something out of Animal Farm. Again, for the upteenth time, I do NOT claim that either party is more to blame than the other re where negotiations are currently at. If for example someone offers you a bad deal and you accept it that's on you. If two parties want different things and can't find an acceptable middle ground that's just how it is. Apportioning blame (as I have said repeatedly) is pointless and entirely subjective.

@nooneinparticular Said

the UK's own position has been just as, if not more, selfish in pursuit of it's own goals?

I don't think one side has been more 'selfish' than the other. This is to do with the blame game which I have previously called pointless and subjective. You however seem to be saying that the UK has been more "selfish in pursuit of it's own goals" than the EU. What do you base this on? Where is your 'evidence'?

@nooneinparticular Said

Giving NI the ability to decide the borders is a concession to NI and only NI.

Leaving N.I in the single market is very obviously a concession to the EU. The UK want to leave as a whole. The EU don't want N.I to leave. What BJ has proposed is a concession to the EU.

@nooneinparticular Said

This entire debacle at the border is entirely due to the GFA. The EU don't WANT to keep NI indefinitely in the EU.

Not (apparently) according to Merkel and others. Still, nice that you KNOW what the 'EU' think.

@nooneinparticular Said

The EU WANT to not be subject to international repercussions from violating the GFA

Explain to me how the EU would be "subject to international repercussions from violating the GFA" when they arent even signatories to the GFA. How can you violate a treaty you have never signed? How exactly does that work?

@nooneinparticular Said

Keeping NI in the single market, from an EU perspective, is simply an ends to a means, nothing more.

That's your opinion. I believe it's a means to an end. Ultimately only people like Barnier know where the truth lies.

@nooneinparticular Said

Suppose that Merkel came out and said, 'no I never said such a thing'. Would you believe her? Would that denial even matter at all?

My oath it would matter. Then it would simply be a case of he said, she said. IMO the burden of proof lies with the person making the allegation. So if Merkel came out and said "no I never said such a thing" then I personally would give her the benefit of the doubt. Not because I believe her more than BJ but because I think, as I stated, that the burden of proof would lie with him.

@nooneinparticular Said

You just end up working the same problem from the opposite end. Whether you start a deal making process from Parliament or the EU, you still have to take into account the others stance. Yes, Theresa May showed that it was pointless negotiating with the EU if Parliament will never agree to it. Likewise, it is pointless to negotiate with Parliament if the EU will never accept it.


Time will tell.

@nooneinparticular Said

So, you think that the port authority at Calais understands and has accounted for logistical and oversight issues all across the UK and any other countries it plans to do business with in the assessment of the readiness of only their own port? Once it reaches a port of entry, that's not where all the problems end.

The PoC only have to/can only prepare for what is in it's control. They know what factors effect the flow of traffic once it reaches their jurisdiction and they have planned for a whole range of variables. Only the Yellowsnow authors didnt bother to inquire as to what their No Deal plans were.

@nooneinparticular Said

The report actually suggests that the delays will be caused largely by companies who are unprepared to deal with new customs checks and delays at foreign ports, and even lists the French as the primary perpetrator. So, once again, it doesn't really matter what the Port Authority at Calais says. They can't do anything about backlog if the cargo ship's destination is clogged, no matter how prepared they think they can make their own systems.

There are two key assumptions made by yellowsnow in this area. One, that there will be a large number of HGVs that will not have the correct 'paperwork' AND two, that there will be "limited space in French Ports (primarily Calais) to hold unready HGVs". This in turn could reduce the flow rate by "40-60%" as "unready HGVs will fill the ports and block flow". That is what yellowsnow says. So let's look at that. First up, if you are projecting a possible worse case scenario then assuming 4-5 months out that no more HGVs will be cross border compliant is not unreasonable. However, the problems with the report start with what comes next. Yellowsnow explicitly states that there will be "limited space in French Ports (primarily Calais) to hold unready HGVs". They say this without having visited the Ports and without having spoken to the Port Authorities. By far the biggest Port is Calais and they have built (did so last year) very large holding areas AWAY from the Port to hold unready HGVs. So what they have actually done is the complete opposite of what the authors of yellowsnow claim. Yellowsnow goes on and says that "unready HGVs will fill the ports and block flow". Based on what? Limited space for unready HGVs? We know there is plenty of space. Based on computer simulations? Nope. Based on talking to the PoC? Nope. Based on visiting the PoC? Again no. Furthermore, as previously stated the PoC have stress tested their no deal preparations multiple times, both via computer simulations and by using trucks on the ground. Their conclusion is there will NOT be any clogging of the Port, NO "block flow".

@nooneinparticular Said

If such a reason is actually true, that could make both Calais' own reports AND that of Yellowhammers accurate...

No it couldn't. Yellowsnow assumes unready HGVs will block the main Ports due to their numbers and a lack of space. Calais is far and away the largest French Port. They have built brand new, and very extensive areas AWAY from the Port for customs checks to avoid any notable congestion. They have also recruited more than 700 extra customs officers, and implemented and tested a brand new computerised “smart border”. They have actually claimed on numerous occasions that people will not be able to tell the difference btw the last day the UK is in the EU and the first day that it isnt. As for Dover, the CEO has said that "The port of Dover is fully ready for Brexit". Now does that mean there will definitely be NO delays? The French are very confident. Dover understandably takes a slightly more conservative approach. But based on their public comments both the PoD and the PoC Authorities seem extremely confident their ports will not be filled by unready HGVs that would block flow. Now had the yellowsnow authors bothered to visit the ports in question, and speak to the authorities, they would have known what preparations had been undertaken and what stress testing had been done. But instead they remained in their comfortable offices and wrote their report based on what? A hunch? Fantasy? Hope? Certainly not on known facts. In short no report that ignores key facts can be called reasonable. It just can't.

Anyway, I have said plenty about yellowsnow and cant be bothered going on and on about the same things. You and I have a different view re it's worth and I for one am happy to leave it at that.
Jennifer1984 On July 20, 2022
Returner and proud





Penzance, United Kingdom
#215New Post! Oct 15, 2019 @ 17:43:12
@shadowen Said



Anyway, I have said plenty about yellowsnow and cant be bothered going on and on about the same things. You and I have a different view re it's worth and I for one am happy to leave it at that.


Well, you'd clearly lost the argument so back out now while you've got a plausible excuse and can put a saving face on it.

Meanwhile in Brussels

Talks have carried on today. The Brexiters are getting their hopes up and clearly some who voted down May's deal look ready to accept the Johnson version of the same thing.

It's likely that if any deal is agreed then an extension will be needed to get it through Parliament, ratified and formalised to the satisfaction of both parties. That will be acceptable to most even though it will mean going beyond 31 October. The only question is; How long...?

What Johnson is keeping quiet about at this time though, is that Britain will have to pay the £39 Billion that he told the EU they could go whistle for. Still, small price for the taxpayer to cough up for his political future.

At this time the momentum seems to be heading towards an agreement by the weekend but the numbers....... the numbers......

There is also the possibility that Amendments to any agreement between the government and the EU will tabled. Hints are already being dropped. Including ratification by second referendum.

Again, that could become a numbers game. Still very interesting.
Jennifer1984 On July 20, 2022
Returner and proud





Penzance, United Kingdom
#216New Post! Oct 15, 2019 @ 21:56:59
Tory meltdown coming.........

Split Opens Up Among Tory Eurosceptics Over Whether To Accept Johnson Plan



the biggest problem Brexiters had with May's deal was the backstop, which applied to the whole of the UK and kept us in a bare bones CU until some magical border technology came along. A border down the Irish Sea solves that little problem and means the rest of the UK would be completely independent of the EU. It'd mean the hardest of Brexits for the rest of us - a deeply, deeply depressing scenario.

It was like this in the first place, then we asked for it to be a UK wide backstop, and then we blamed the EU for giving us something that we asked for and rejected it, and now we're back to what we had in the first place. Only different. A bit. But not by very much.

Oh, and there is talk that there will be a big aid package for Northern Ireland paid for by UK, ROI and the EU.

I think the word we're looking for there is "Sweetener".
Jennifer1984 On July 20, 2022
Returner and proud





Penzance, United Kingdom
#217New Post! Oct 16, 2019 @ 05:23:32
Well..... today's the day.

The British government has to present the legal text of their proposals to the EU by today. If that happens the EU will consider it tomorrow and Friday before the EU Summit on Saturday when they will decide whether or not to accept it.

If accepted, the proposal will be put before the House of Commons to accept, amend or throw it out.

Johnson is trying to prepare for a vote in the House on Saturday. He is confident he has the numbers but nobody takes anything Johnson says at face value.

Pushing for an early vote would be a gamble on his part. The House could table amendments, or even table another motion demanding a general election or second referendum before accepting the proposal. That is not out of the question.

Such an event would require Johnson to go back to the EU to ask for another extension. Johnson doesn't want that because he has pinned so much on leaving on 31 October he would surely be damaged politically. ERG headbangers were storming out of Number 10 last night with faces like thunder, and Farage is rabble rousing his BXP acolytes again.

If a general election is called and Farage goes for a "gloves off" war with the Conservative Party for Brexiter votes (which is not out of the question) it could split the Brexit vote which will only benefit the Remain parties.

Endgame gets a little closer today. But how it will finally pan out is STILL no clearer.

My money is still on acceptance of the deal in the House of Commons and UK leaving with - what is to all intents and purposes - Teresa May's deal that was voted down by three times by massive margins. It would get Britain out of the EU, but that wouldn't be the end of Brexit.

It would be the start of a whole new political war over here.
nooneinparticular On March 16, 2023




, Hawaii
#218New Post! Oct 16, 2019 @ 07:43:29
@shadowen Said

Who thought over 20 Tories would cross the floor and join a rebel alliance that includes a Corbyn led Labour. The Lib Dems, SNP and Plaid Cymru are all determined to revoke article 50 at the first possible opportunity. It's clear a number of former Tory MP's (like Hammond and Grieve) are also set firmly against Brexit. Infact Hammond and Grieve said they only crossed the floor and supported the Benn Surrender Act to prevent a no deal exit and to encourage BJ to fully pursue a new deal. And yet here they are today, doing all they can to put the kybosh on any deal BJ might bring back. They are even committed to forcing an extension using the Benn Surrender Act even if Parliament were to pass BJ's deal. Bear in mind of course that the great majority of MP's are remainers (though not all are remoaners). Many would support Labour's referendum esp as remain would be almost certain to win as the Brexit Party, UKIP, ERG, DUP etc would never support May's deal. They would rather remain and start again in their efforts to get the UK out of the EU. So yes, I think there could be the numbers there to push through Labour's referendum. I'm not saying that this will happen, but it certainly could. I think it would be pretty tight one way or the other


You're talking about how each party would view the referendum if it were designed in that specific way. I said that such a referendum would be difficult to get enough support for to begin with. We are talking about two entirely different things here. Why would UKIP, ERG, DUP, etc. even agree to a referendum framed that way in the first place? Why would the parts of Labour that want to leave agree to such a framing? They have no reason to, fighting in Parliament would be preferable to a second vote framed like that.

Quote:

Because remoaners are so sold on "Project Fear", because they find it so compelling, it has become an important part of their overall strategy. The problem is it just hasn't been very successful re getting neutral or leave supporters to back remain. And yet they continue to push it. Having said that, I suppose to some extent you could argue that "Project Fear" has had some form of qualified success in so far that it has been passionately embraced by remoaners. This in turn may have helped convince some of the former Tory MP's to cross the floor. That said I think it's more of an excuse for them to act as they did rather than a reason in and of itself. But ultimately that is speculation as unlike some people who discuss Brexit I don't claim to know what people are really thinking when they say and do different things.


I was unaware that components of a plan gained or lost significance based on how much people believe in them. Silly me thought that significance was based on operational objectives and how crucial to the overall plan each component was.

Quote:

Simple. To flat out ignore the result of the single largest democratic vote in the UK's history right off the bat would have cost the Government votes and power. Better to pretend to support the result of the people's vote whilst quietly working to try and ignore it through endless delays and obstruction dressed up as good will. It's only been since BJ became PM that the remoaner MP's have been forced to step out of the shadows and reveal their true intentions (eg Hammond and Grieve).


Right. Because delaying to this length has done wonders for the Governments votes and power.

Quote:

1. You said "I don't understand how you can claim that the UK having minimum requirements for a deal is not duplicitous, but that the EU having the same is."

I replied with "You SHOW me where I have said that it's ok for the UK to have min acceptable objectives but that it is not ok for the EU to do the same."

You still havent done that. SHOW me where I have said as you claim.

What I have said however are things like:
"i dont think EITHER party issued any ultimatums"

"Personally I find the blame game pointless. It is entirely subjective and ultimately irrelevant"

2. You said: "Oh so if you call the EU's minimal acceptable objectives selfish, that makes them no longer minimal acceptable objectives does it?"

Where did I say this? Again, I have said that playing the blame game is pointless and subjective. You could argue that both sides are being 'selfish' is so far as they both want an outcome that is in their best interests. You however seem to imply that I believe that the EU are bad for insisting on min. objectives whilst BJ is good for doing the same thing. So SHOW me where I have said something along these lines. QUOTE me.


Okay so let's clear something up here then. When you said earlier that:

Quote:
"It is interesting that the EU gave May a deal they must have known had no chance of being accepted. A deal that would have left the UK trapped in the EU for an indefinite period of time. And yet EU lovers claim that Barnier and co were being fair and reasonable."


Here. You were not, in fact, saying that Barnier and co were being unfair and unreasonable? You were not implying that they were being selfish? You were not attempting to blame the EU for why May's Deal was not acceptable?

Quote:

3. You said: "Or the implication in multiple posts that because the EU is being selfish, it's largely their fault that negotiations are where they are?"


See previous.

Also Here.

Quote:
Their resolve not to compromise their so called 'values' hasnt been tested as they have known from the start that the UK won't leave without a deal.


"So called" values? As in not really values? As in they are not negotiating in good faith?

Not to mention the repeated posts accusing the Rebel Alliance and the EU of working together to stop and reverse Brexit. Such as post# 159

Quote:
I think that whether or not the EU decide to enter into serious negotiations with BJ will be dependent upon how likely they think it is that the UK will be able to leave on the 31st of October without a deal. The EU do not want the UK to leave. You have Jo Swinson writing to Juncker urging him not to accept any deal put forward by BJ. You have others within the rebel alliance telling the EU that they can stop BJ taking the UK out of the EU. IF they believe Parliament can stop BJ then I believe they will not accept any changes to May's deal and instead put their trust in the rebel alliance and their efforts to prevent the UK from leaving. If on the other hand they think that BJ could actually take the UK out at the end of the month without a deal then I think they will negotiate. At the moment it seems that the EU is unsure if the rebel alliance really can stop BJ. Compare how they have treated BJ's proposal to how they treated May's attempts to re-negotiate.




Quote:

So come on then, what are these multiple posts. You are claiming I hold a position that you never back up. QUOTE me. I'm not like someone else who sees everything in black and white. BJ bad, EU good. A variation of something out of Animal Farm. Again, for the upteenth time, I do NOT claim that either party is more to blame than the other re where negotiations are currently at. If for example someone offers you a bad deal and you accept it that's on you. If two parties want different things and can't find an acceptable middle ground that's just how it is. Apportioning blame (as I have said repeatedly) is pointless and entirely subjective.


The blame game is pointless? You have done nothing but play a blame game this entire time. You have blamed 'remoaners', the rebels, the EU, pretty much everyone involved except Brexit backers in line with Johnson. In fact, we got into a long argument about 'who' was to blame. You're telling me that when you say things like "(the Lib Dems and Labour) are the reason there is a 'zombie Parliament' at the moment" here that you're not blaming them for the state of Parliament and by extension, the state of the negotiations?

Quote:

I don't think one side has been more 'selfish' than the other. This is to do with the blame game which I have previously called pointless and subjective. You however seem to be saying that the UK has been more "selfish in pursuit of it's own goals" than the EU. What do you base this on? Where is your 'evidence'?


What would you call a government negotiating a proposal, failing to enact that proposal, and coming back to ask for a better one?

Quote:

Leaving N.I in the single market is very obviously a concession to the EU. The UK want to leave as a whole. The EU don't want N.I to leave. What BJ has proposed is a concession to the EU.


Not (apparently) according to Merkel and others. Still, nice that you KNOW what the 'EU' think.


In comparison to both the UK and the EU, NI literally serves no strategic or commercial purpose other than as a buffer. In what value could there possibly be in keeping it?

Quote:

Explain to me how the EU would be "subject to international repercussions from violating the GFA" when they arent even signatories to the GFA. How can you violate a treaty you have never signed? How exactly does that work?


ROI is part of the EU. If ROI violates the GFA it will undoubtedly drag the EU into its mess. Especially since they would be violating an issue partly revolving around trade. A subject that involves the entirety of the EU and not just Ireland.

Perception is just as important in international politics as it is in national politics.

Quote:

That's your opinion. I believe it's a means to an end. Ultimately only people like Barnier know where the truth lies.


My oath it would matter. Then it would simply be a case of he said, she said. IMO the burden of proof lies with the person making the allegation. So if Merkel came out and said "no I never said such a thing" then I personally would give her the benefit of the doubt. Not because I believe her more than BJ but because I think, as I stated, that the burden of proof would lie with him.


Fine. And I did ask how you would react. Personally I find that a nonsense position, but that's neither here nor there. Personally I think burden of proof should apply regardless of whether or not Merkel says anything about it. Whether or not Boris is telling the truth should be the issue here, not whether or not Merkel responded to it.

I will say this though. Distracting and devolving into a 'he said she said' argument is probably not a productive path for either party

Quote:

Time will tell.


The PoC only have to/can only prepare for what is in it's control. They know what factors effect the flow of traffic once it reaches their jurisdiction and they have planned for a whole range of variables. Only the Yellowsnow authors didnt bother to inquire as to what their No Deal plans were.


There are two key assumptions made by yellowsnow in this area. One, that there will be a large number of HGVs that will not have the correct 'paperwork' AND two, that there will be "limited space in French Ports (primarily Calais) to hold unready HGVs". This in turn could reduce the flow rate by "40-60%" as "unready HGVs will fill the ports and block flow". That is what yellowsnow says. So let's look at that. First up, if you are projecting a possible worse case scenario then assuming 4-5 months out that no more HGVs will be cross border compliant is not unreasonable. However, the problems with the report start with what comes next. Yellowsnow explicitly states that there will be "limited space in French Ports (primarily Calais) to hold unready HGVs". They say this without having visited the Ports and without having spoken to the Port Authorities. By far the biggest Port is Calais and they have built (did so last year) very large holding areas AWAY from the Port to hold unready HGVs. So what they have actually done is the complete opposite of what the authors of yellowsnow claim. Yellowsnow goes on and says that "unready HGVs will fill the ports and block flow". Based on what? Limited space for unready HGVs? We know there is plenty of space. Based on computer simulations? Nope. Based on talking to the PoC? Nope. Based on visiting the PoC? Again no. Furthermore, as previously stated the PoC have stress tested their no deal preparations multiple times, both via computer simulations and by using trucks on the ground. Their conclusion is there will NOT be any clogging of the Port, NO "block flow".


No it couldn't. Yellowsnow assumes unready HGVs will block the main Ports due to their numbers and a lack of space. Calais is far and away the largest French Port. They have built brand new, and very extensive areas AWAY from the Port for customs checks to avoid any notable congestion. They have also recruited more than 700 extra customs officers, and implemented and tested a brand new computerised “smart border”. They have actually claimed on numerous occasions that people will not be able to tell the difference btw the last day the UK is in the EU and the first day that it isnt. As for Dover, the CEO has said that "The port of Dover is fully ready for Brexit". Now does that mean there will definitely be NO delays? The French are very confident. Dover understandably takes a slightly more conservative approach. But based on their public comments both the PoD and the PoC Authorities seem extremely confident their ports will not be filled by unready HGVs that would block flow. Now had the yellowsnow authors bothered to visit the ports in question, and speak to the authorities, they would have known what preparations had been undertaken and what stress testing had been done. But instead they remained in their comfortable offices and wrote their report based on what? A hunch? Fantasy? Hope? Certainly not on known facts. In short no report that ignores key facts can be called reasonable. It just can't.

Anyway, I have said plenty about yellowsnow and cant be bothered going on and on about the same things. You and I have a different view re it's worth and I for one am happy to leave it at that.


Fine. Suit yourself. I would like to say one thing myself though.

You maintain that yellow hammer is worthless because it doesn't take into account mitigating factors. I would like to counter and say that an analysis that doesn't take into account mitigating factors is useful as a 'what if' scenario. Such as 'what if the governments attempts to mitigate fall through the floor and fail?'

I honestly don't know what their chances of success are, but it never hurts to have a backup plan.
Jennifer1984 On July 20, 2022
Returner and proud





Penzance, United Kingdom
#219New Post! Oct 17, 2019 @ 04:49:05
You're wasting your time, Noone. The Aussie's gone walkabout and won't talk to you either now. He's in a sulk because throughout the whole farrago of Brexit his arguments have been debunked, first by me and now by you. He's gone off in a strop.

I'm surprised though, that you have nothing to say about the events that are currently transpiring. Sure, all this forum technical tennis is fine when discussing this-or-that effect, or the finer nuances of such-and-such a document, but Brexit is happening NOW and you seem oblivious of that.

Overnight, the British government has made more concessions on customs, the Stormont vote and agreement on level playing field. And people thought May was soft...!!!

The bottom line is that Johnson has cribbed most of May's original deal and presented it with a slimy new cover. Of course he had to do that because the original plan of leaving with no deal was effectively scuppered by the Benn Act, so he had to come up with something else quickly.

The EU have probably accepted it but are being careful and making sure their position is legally watertight. inside, I bet they're grinning like the Cheshire Cat.

From what we know (and we don't know really), it appears it's the first offer from the EU, the NI only backstop. Except it won't be called the backstop but it will be the backstop which allows a whole heap of Tories and DUPers to backdown. Maybe the level playing field bits are moved to the political declaration. If anything is still to be ironed out, it is the question of consent. I'm sure the EU want to make that watertight so they'll be going over that word by word. Nothing is agreed until everything is agreed.

All this looks like something that the EU already proposed, plus sweeteners for the DUP and a bit of fiddling to make it look like Johnson is the hero for the Brexiters: "Isn't he brilliant, he got them to open the WA..!!"

All speculation at this point but we should know by the weekend.

As for the legal text, Cummings will no doubt have some sort of plan to railroad that through the HOC. Perhaps attempt to get a vote during the Saturday sitting. There has been plenty of arm-twisting going on over the last few days. The ERG are smiling now whereas only a couple of nights ago they were in a fury. The likes of Mark Francois left Downing Street looking like his arse was on fire.

Mairead McGuinness said she was baffled how the HOC could vote to ratify a new legal text 36 hours after it was published.....it would surely need days of scrutiny, but nobody would put it past Cummings to attempt to have it ratified without scrutiny or debate.

In the end it seems Johnson has now managed to bring his Tory remainers onside. Corbyn is still unable to ensure his own MP's will back his position. The DUP votes are essential to pushing this through but the sweeteners will take care of that. The DUP would sell their own kids to white slavers if the price was right, and some of the 21 purged Tory MP's may be tempted by the lure of being welcomed back into the fold if they vote the way Boris wants them to.

So..... will Johnson go for a vote in the HOC on Saturday..? It's his best bet of getting it through because nobody will have had time to read the full draft and legal text through before voting. He wants to rule the chaos. If he gets a vote then, I reckon he'll win.

All speculation of course, but this is happening NOW and you seem to be oblivious to it.

Brexit has provided a great talking shop for you and the Aussie. I've been watching the ebb and flow of that. You've clearly won the argument so kudos to you for that. I don't want to argue with you, but I would appreciate your views on the current situation.
crusty_fart On May 27, 2022




Somewhere, United Kingdom
#220New Post! Oct 17, 2019 @ 12:08:11
f*** Europe. Hand Germany to Putin and lets have France to ourselves.

Then become the next state of USA> All hail God Emperor Trump.

Make Britain Great Again (and part of the USA)
Jennifer1984 On July 20, 2022
Returner and proud





Penzance, United Kingdom
#221New Post! Oct 17, 2019 @ 18:10:43
@crusty_fart Said

f*** Europe. Hand Germany to Putin and lets have France to ourselves.

Then become the next state of USA> All hail God Emperor Trump.

Make Britain Great Again (and part of the USA)



Yeah. That was really constructive.

Thanks for that.

Actually, the second sentence is precisely what Johnson intended to do if he had got his A plan through.

Unfortunately, handing UK on a plate to the USA was knocked off the plot by the Benn Act, and in any case, the US senate will block any deal the UK tries to make with USA that will shaft Ireland.

And the NHS is looking safer now than it was before. Not fully safe, but less at risk than before.

We may still end up with a s***ty deal that means Britons having to scrap all our (EU) hygiene and safe food quality regulations so we can become a dumping ground for American food that before Brexit we wouldn't have fed to pigs.

But that's as close as it will get.
mrmhead On March 27, 2024




NE, Ohio
#222New Post! Oct 18, 2019 @ 02:14:42
@crusty_fart Said

f*** Europe. Hand Germany to Putin and lets have France to ourselves.

Then become the next state of USA> All hail God Emperor Trump.

Make Britain Great Again (and part of the USA)



Screw that, once the Muslims overrun France, the UKA (United Kingdom of the Americas) won't want anything to do with Europe!

We'll build a Wall - a Great Wall along the channel!!
mrmhead On March 27, 2024




NE, Ohio
#223New Post! Oct 18, 2019 @ 02:19:39
@mrmhead Said

Screw that, once the Muslims overrun France, the UKA (United Kingdom of the Americas) won't want anything to do with Europe!

We'll build a Wall - a Great Wall along the channel!!


.. absorb Mexico, and fill the panama canal with alligators and piranha to keep the southerners out!!
nooneinparticular On March 16, 2023




, Hawaii
#224New Post! Oct 18, 2019 @ 02:29:29
@Jennifer1984 Said

I'm surprised though, that you have nothing to say about the events that are currently transpiring. Sure, all this forum technical tennis is fine when discussing this-or-that effect, or the finer nuances of such-and-such a document, but Brexit is happening NOW and you seem oblivious of that.


If I'm being perfectly honest, I'm only really interested in this from an academic perspective. I appreciate you have quite a bit more riding on this than idle curiosity, but personally I can't really say the same. While that may make me seem cold, I prefer to be honest about who and what I am. So while I do know that things are happening right now on the Brexit front, from my own outsider perspective

Quote:

Overnight, the British government has made more concessions on customs, the Stormont vote and agreement on level playing field. And people thought May was soft...!!!

The bottom line is that Johnson has cribbed most of May's original deal and presented it with a slimy new cover. Of course he had to do that because the original plan of leaving with no deal was effectively scuppered by the Benn Act, so he had to come up with something else quickly.

The EU have probably accepted it but are being careful and making sure their position is legally watertight. inside, I bet they're grinning like the Cheshire Cat.


I don't know if I'd go that far. I don't even know if I'd say that they're particularly pleased with the current situation, even if they quickly agree on something now. I suspect that double-extension was not exactly free in terms of patience on both sides of the channel, regardless of what the diplomatic faces present to the public.

If that fatigue turns out to be real, then the real negotiation that hasn't even started yet is going to be...something to watch to say the very least.

Quote:

From what we know (and we don't know really), it appears it's the first offer from the EU, the NI only backstop. Except it won't be called the backstop but it will be the backstop which allows a whole heap of Tories and DUPers to backdown. Maybe the level playing field bits are moved to the political declaration. If anything is still to be ironed out, it is the question of consent. I'm sure the EU want to make that watertight so they'll be going over that word by word. Nothing is agreed until everything is agreed.

All this looks like something that the EU already proposed, plus sweeteners for the DUP and a bit of fiddling to make it look like Johnson is the hero for the Brexiters: "Isn't he brilliant, he got them to open the WA..!!"

All speculation at this point but we should know by the weekend.

As for the legal text, Cummings will no doubt have some sort of plan to railroad that through the HOC. Perhaps attempt to get a vote during the Saturday sitting. There has been plenty of arm-twisting going on over the last few days. The ERG are smiling now whereas only a couple of nights ago they were in a fury. The likes of Mark Francois left Downing Street looking like his arse was on fire.

Mairead McGuinness said she was baffled how the HOC could vote to ratify a new legal text 36 hours after it was published.....it would surely need days of scrutiny, but nobody would put it past Cummings to attempt to have it ratified without scrutiny or debate.

In the end it seems Johnson has now managed to bring his Tory remainers onside. Corbyn is still unable to ensure his own MP's will back his position. The DUP votes are essential to pushing this through but the sweeteners will take care of that. The DUP would sell their own kids to white slavers if the price was right, and some of the 21 purged Tory MP's may be tempted by the lure of being welcomed back into the fold if they vote the way Boris wants them to.

So..... will Johnson go for a vote in the HOC on Saturday..? It's his best bet of getting it through because nobody will have had time to read the full draft and legal text through before voting. He wants to rule the chaos. If he gets a vote then, I reckon he'll win.

All speculation of course, but this is happening NOW and you seem to be oblivious to it.

Brexit has provided a great talking shop for you and the Aussie. I've been watching the ebb and flow of that. You've clearly won the argument so kudos to you for that. I don't want to argue with you, but I would appreciate your views on the current situation.


Typically I don't comment on speculation because it's speculative and subject to change very quickly. With that being said, I don't really know what I can add here. I don't keep a particularly close eye on UK politics so I can't really comment on the liklyhood of anything you've said actually happening. The only things I can say from my perspective is that, Corbyn's party is scrambling, I don't know what the hell Johnson did to pull support behind him as I don't know what is in any new tweaks being done, the Tory Rebels only seemed united on that they wanted a deal so I really don't know how they'll respond to this one, I got the feeling that the DUP, and in fact most Brexiteers, wouldn't be too miffed if NI got shafted in any deal reached as long as they 'left', and everything's moving uncharacteristically quickly for a government but I guess that's what happens when you play brinkmanship.

Aside from those things, I freely admit that I don't have the data or knowledge to really make a good guess at this point, so I can neither back nor repudiate your statements and thoughts here.
Jennifer1984 On July 20, 2022
Returner and proud





Penzance, United Kingdom
#225New Post! Oct 18, 2019 @ 05:45:29
@nooneinparticular Said

If I'm being perfectly honest, I'm only really interested in this from an academic perspective. I appreciate you have quite a bit more riding on this than idle curiosity, but personally I can't really say the same. While that may make me seem cold, I prefer to be honest about who and what I am. So while I do know that things are happening right now on the Brexit front, from my own outsider perspective.


I appreciate that point of view. Indeed, I'm appreciative of your objectivity in all this and have been quite impressed by your willingness to maintain an opinion that isn't driven by one side or the other.

The "outsider perspective" is very useful in as much as you have clearly have no agenda. I, naturally, have a vested interest in the outcome, after all, it is the future of myself and my family that will be affected.




@nooneinparticular Said

I don't know if I'd go that far. I don't even know if I'd say that they're particularly pleased with the current situation, even if they quickly agree on something now. I suspect that double-extension was not exactly free in terms of patience on both sides of the channel, regardless of what the diplomatic faces present to the public.

If that fatigue turns out to be real, then the real negotiation that hasn't even started yet is going to be...something to watch to say the very least.


I think the EU is very happy with the outcome of negotiations. It is true that they have made compromises after saying that the WA was not up for discussion, but once Leo Varadkar accepted that there was the basis of something to agree when he met Boris Johnson in the Wirral, they had to move.

The EU is highly sensitive to the wishes of the Republic of Ireland. They were always going to attach high priority to what Ireland wants. Varadkar's encouraging comments to Johnson committed not just Ireland, but the EU to taking the talks forward.

But it is quite clear that the EU has come out of this far better than UK. They have got almost everything they wanted with minimal concessions whereas UK has had to concede the Hard Brexit that the likes of Farage, the ERG and others wanted. it's worth noting that Farage is kicking up on Twitter:

Farage Is Upset. Not A Bad Thing.

There will be ramifications to this. But that's for another day.

The DUP have stated they won't support the 'deal'. This will make it harder to get through Parliament tomorrow. We will be in London for the People's Vote march. We hope to be in Parliament Square by the time Mr Speaker calls "Division". We will be making a lot of noise that the members will hear as they go through the voting lobbies. Let's hope they're listening.


@nooneinparticular Said

Typically I don't comment on speculation because it's speculative and subject to change very quickly. With that being said, I don't really know what I can add here. I don't keep a particularly close eye on UK politics so I can't really comment on the liklyhood of anything you've said actually happening. The only things I can say from my perspective is that, Corbyn's party is scrambling, I don't know what the hell Johnson did to pull support behind him as I don't know what is in any new tweaks being done, the Tory Rebels only seemed united on that they wanted a deal so I really don't know how they'll respond to this one, I got the feeling that the DUP, and in fact most Brexiteers, wouldn't be too miffed if NI got shafted in any deal reached as long as they 'left', and everything's moving uncharacteristically quickly for a government but I guess that's what happens when you play brinkmanship.


Speculation is all we have at this time. I always specify when I'm speculating or putting forward an opinion because I don't want my messages to be misconstrued or give the impression I'm stating something as fact.

Speculation invites further discussion and helps to get thoughts out into the open - as long as we acknowledge that it IS speculation. It's a valid form of discussion



@nooneinparticular Said

Aside from those things, I freely admit that I don't have the data or knowledge to really make a good guess at this point, so I can neither back nor repudiate your statements and thoughts here.



Honestly.... neither do I. None of us have. None of us know what is being said or done behind closed doors.

For sure, there is a lot of arm-twisting going on by both sides. That's par for the course with politics so no surprise there.

We have to wait for tomorrow's vote in the HOC. I'm a little less sure that the deal will pass after the DUP's declaration of no support.

But what do I know...??
Reply to Topic<< Previous Topic | Next Topic >>
Pages: << · 1 2 3 ...13 14 15 16 17 ...73 74 75 · >>

1 browsing (0 members - 1 guest)

Quick Reply
Politics Forum - Some Rudeness Allowed

      
Subscribe to topic prefs

Similar Topics
    Forum Topic Last Post Replies Views
New posts   Politics
Sun Nov 08, 2020 @ 19:25
143 6607
New posts   News & Current Events
Sun Sep 26, 2010 @ 02:18
14 1612
New posts   UK Elections & Politics
Sun Dec 09, 2018 @ 00:19
44 4488
New posts   Politics
Tue Jan 05, 2010 @ 17:54
68 2686
New posts   Basketball
Sat Apr 10, 2010 @ 06:56
15 4290