Another new Brexit thread

[Ancient Citizen]

No it’s accepted. But equally I get bored with people asking why I want to overturn ‘a democratic vote’ as if democratic votes are never overturned or re-examined or re-evaluated if issues or circumstances change.

Brexiteers should have used the referendum result to fashion a Brexit policy that found favour with a majority on both sides of the argument. Instead a hard line was adopted and polarisation and division deepened. The Treaty of Versailles versus The Marshall Plan.

This would be relevant if we weren't told that 'This is a once in a lifetime decision."
Changing the parameters when the result isn't what you wanted is not on.

 

[blueinsa]

We’ll just have to live with you saying a big fat no then.
I’m sure most of us will get over it.

As will you when we leave.

 

[George Hannah]

Is this a Clarkie? Surely it must be.

from last night - in response to @Chris in London -

The final few minutes of this excellent film contains his summation of the moral of 1984 inviting the question - how?
My answer is vote leave.

 

[Vic]

There is the problem.
You demand answers, reasons, explanations, because in common with your grouping, you simply cannot reconcile yourself to losing.

Is that a spoof? Reinforcing the impression that Leavers have no answers, no explanations, and are beyond reason.

 

[BobKowalski]

The key is overturned after they have been honoured unless you can show me where we have voted before only for the result and democratic majority to be ignored?

Leave and vote to rejoin by all means.

Anything else is a big fat no from me I am afraid.

Then honour it by compromising on what can realistically be achieved. The WA did honour the referendum as it meant leaving the EU. Yet Brexiteers rejected this which in turn pushes people like me into a more hard line stance.

To meet in the middle ground both sides have to move.

 

[west didsblue]

As will you when we leave.

Out of interest, would you accept May’s deal over No Deal?

 

[Ancient Citizen]

Is that a spoof? Reinforcing the impression that Leavers have no answers, no explanations, and are beyond reason.

You got all the answers you needed on the morning after 23/6/2016.
The foot stamping crybaby act following that date, are something best discussed with a counsellor.

 

[Ifwecouldjust.......]

Nope. It's in a No Deal scenario.

The £15bn is an estimate of 215 million extra customs declarations at a cost to firms of an average of £35 per declaration - £7.5bn doubled because EU exporters to the UK will face the same. All costs that are likely to be added to prices which consumers will pay.

The administration cost of import / export remains if we come out of the single market / customs union (deal or no deal) ... this was covered off in a session in the HoC Select Committee on Brexit

 

[George Hannah]

Thats just youre oppinionated "out of the thin air" random BS. I could ask you what the indications would be for it, but since you refered to 1984 i would rather want to ask what indications there are that were described in 1984 aswell. Pardon me but i don't see any attempts at pro EU brainwashing, i do see plenty of UK media peddling outright lies about the EU. I believe Brexit with all it's lies and notably silly political languaghe (much sovereigity ja) aproaches more the issue's that Orwell warned us about that any element of the EU. I don't think you understand Orwell well George.

Perhaps reading his actual words is where I went wrong then. Anyway do look at the Youtube Film, it's a compelling watch.

 

[Coatigan]

Ah? I butted in on George his reaction, since i had my other impression on what 1984 was really about. That essay is likely different, just like "salut to Catalonia" aint 1984 neither.

It isn't the first time a valid point (the original reference) was hijacked/misunderstood and twisted to argue a brexit misconstrusion. You are right in what you are responding to. i'm just pointing out the merit of the initial comparison which has now been somewhat lost.

 

[FlemishDuck]

from last night - in response to @Chris in London -

The final few minutes of this excellent film contains his summation of the moral of 1984 inviting the question - how?
My answer is vote leave.

I just had a check to see what you were pointing at and i don't see it.I don't think you get what 1984 is about. It's like the only thing you know is that Orwell wrote about a sort of totalitarian state, and because you wish to hold the view that the EU is totalitarian you assume that the book describes features of the EU. It doesn't, in fact it features more elements of UK politics to be fair.

It isn't the first time a valid point (the original reference) was hijacked/misunderstood and twisted to argue a brexit misconstrusion. You are right in what you are responding to. i'm just pointing out the merit of the initial comparison which has now been somewhat lost.

It's appreciated, i actually never read that essay of Orwell on nationalism though, ill check it out.

 

[George Hannah]

I just had a check to see what you were pointing at and i don't see it.I don't think you get what 1984 is about. It's like the only thing you know is that Orwell wrote about a sort of totalitarian state, and because you wish to hold the view that the EU is totalitarian you assume that the book describes features of the EU. It doesn't, in fact it features more elements of UK politics to be faiir

Whatever you quack friend.

 

[blueinsa]

Out of interest, would you accept May’s deal over No Deal?

Yes but no deal trumps remaining everytime because we voted to leave, not remain.

I'm more than hopeful we will get a deal still as no deal and a border enforced by the EU makes everyone realise that they need to agree one.

 

[BobKowalski]

The NI backstop is back on baby. Not quite sure how the EU’s preferred backstop is a major concession but there you go. Spinners gonna spin I guess

‘EU ready to make a major concession on consent by allowing a double majority in the NI assembly to leave new Irish backstop after (as yet) unspecified number of years’

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/...st-chance-to-keep-brexit-deal-alive-9zm5qltvt

 

[dave_blue12]

Are you shocked to the core dave?

I'm way too wise to be shocked by anything.

I'd just like to see the evidence that we are comparing apples with apples.

But for the avoidance of doubt I am against any form of targetted propaganda based on individual psychological profiles.

 

[George Hannah]

It isn't the first time a valid point (the original reference) was hijacked/misunderstood and twisted to argue a brexit misconstrusion. You are right in what you are responding to. i'm just pointing out the merit of the initial comparison which has now been somewhat lost.

Not lost just put in the context of his other writings.
https://www.orwellfoundation.com/th.../essays-and-other-works/notes-on-nationalism/

 

[blueinsa]

Then honour it by compromising on what can realistically be achieved. The WA did honour the referendum as it meant leaving the EU. Yet Brexiteers rejected this which in turn pushes people like me into a more hard line stance.

To meet in the middle ground both sides have to move.

I think the sides that matter are now beginning to move towards each other.

 

[Chris in London]

from last night - in response to @Chris in London -

The final few minutes of this excellent film contains his summation of the moral of 1984 inviting the question - how?
My answer is vote leave.

Presumably George, you would say, as Orwell said in the film, “it’s such a good idea I couldn’t possibly abandon it?”

 

[M18CTID]

Nope ..... the cost is there if we come out...... giving the Tories an excuse for never ending underfunding of services and a reason to flog off the NHS.

It's in the event of No Deal as Vic explained to you 2 posts below yours

 

[George Hannah]

The NI backstop is back on baby. Not quite sure how the EU’s preferred backstop is a major concession but there you go. Spinners gonna spin I guess

‘EU ready to make a major concession on consent by allowing a double majority in the NI assembly to leave new Irish backstop after (as yet) unspecified number of years’

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/...st-chance-to-keep-brexit-deal-alive-9zm5qltvt

Well, well, well - what a surprise
EU throws Boris Johnson a lifeline over Irish backstop

Europe ready to make vital concession

updated
Bruno Waterfield, Brussels |Francis Elliott, Political Editor | Steven Swinford, Oliver Wright
October 9 2019, 9:00am, The Times

Boris Johnson yesterday after he was rebuffed by Angela Merkel. He apparently sought help to “get the boat off the rocks”STEPHEN CHUNG/ALAMY

The EU is ready to make a major concession on a Brexit deal by providing a mechanism for the Northern Irish assembly to leave a new Irish backstop after a set number of years, The Times has learnt.

Diplomatic sources close to the talks said European governments are prepared to concede a unilateral revocation of the withdrawal treaty by Stormont after a period of time. The date of 2025 has been mooted, as long as both communities agree to it.
Last week’s proposals from the UK contained a controversial measure which the EU said would essentially give the DUP a veto. It is one of the major sticking points to getting a deal. Diplomats cite the Good Friday agreement’s commitment to “parity of esteem” for both the unionist and nationalist communities as the reasoning behind having a “double majority”.

A European source has now told The Times: “A landing zone on consent could be a double majority within Stormont, to leave, not to continue with the arrangements after X years.”Under the UK government proposals Northern Ireland would align itself with the EU’s single market rules but not remain inside the customs union.

In return for giving Stormont a “lock” over the deal in the future, the EU wants the government to accept a customs border in the Irish Sea because it will have a time limit if the people of Northern Ireland agree the arrangements do not benefit them.

“With the consent mechanism there is no real political reason for the UK to have a separate customs border that is distinct from another regulatory border as Northern Ireland can decide,” said the source.

EU negotiators do not accept the government’s logic of having two borders, a regulatory one in Irish Sea and customs one on the island of Ireland, and see the new consent offer, unimaginable just a few months ago, as a potential breakthrough.

The offer is seen as an eleventh hour attempt to find a “landing zone” for a deal before the weekend and a make-or-break” summit for European leaders next week.

Mr Varadkar, who is due to hold talks with Mr Johnson as soon as tomorrow, has said that reaching a new Brexit agreement in time for the forthcoming EU summit would be “very difficult” and noted that the EU would not accept a deal at “any cost”.

“There are some fundamental objectives that haven’t changed for the past three years and we need them guaranteed,” he told RTE news. “I think it is going to be very difficult to secure an agreement by next week, quite frankly.

“Essentially what the United Kingdom has done is repudiate the deal that we negotiated in good faith with prime minister May’s government over two years and sort of put half of that now back on the table and are saying, ‘That’s a concession’. And of course it isn’t really.”

The developments follow an extraordinary day of recriminations yesterday which began with an early morning call during which Angela Merkel, the German chancellor, rebuffed Mr Johnson’s appeal for help to rescue negotiations over his new backstop proposals.

Downing Street sources claimed that Mrs Merkel’s response was a “clarifying moment” which suggested that a deal was “essentially impossible, not just now but ever”. It was claimed that Mr Johnson had appealed to her to help him “get the boat off the rocks” but that she had declined to do so.

A No 10 source said: “Merkel said that if Germany wanted to leave the EU they could do it no problem, but the UK cannot leave without leaving Northern Ireland behind in a customs union and in full alignment for ever.”

Mr Johnson also hosted David Sassoli, president of the European Parliament, in Downing Street yesterday. After the meeting Mr Sassoli said that “no progress” had been made. “Angel Merkel’s opinions must be taken seriously. We are all very worried because there are only a few days left,” he told BBC’s Newsnight. “Because we understand that going out without an agreement leads to having a real problem, if not a real catastrophe.”

Iain Duncan Smith, former Conservative leader, claimed that “given the way they [the EU] have treated Boris Johnson’s offer, which would have got through the Commons, tells me they’re not really interested in an agreement”.

The comments from Downing Street provoked a rebuke from Donald Tusk, president of the European Council, who accused Mr Johnson of playing a “stupid blame game”.

Jean-Claude Juncker, president of the European Commission, told Les Échos, a French financial paper: “I do not accept this blame game of blaming the eventual failure of the negotiations on the European Union . . . the explanation is in the British camp.”

The Downing Street briefing also added to cabinet unease over suggestions that Mr Johnson was preparing to fight to secure an election mandate for a no-deal exit. He was also challenged over comments linked to Dominic Cummings, his chief adviser, that the Tories would campaign to leave the EU “immediately” without a deal if the talks broke down. In a “fractious” cabinet meeting after Mr Johnson’s call with Mrs Merkel, Julian Smith, the Northern Ireland secretary, said that no-deal would be disastrous for the Union.

Mr Johnson was also pressed on suggestions that Britain could withdraw security co-operation from countries that backed a Brexit delay. Mr Smith raised concerns about the claims and subsequently tweeted: “I am clear that any threat on withdrawing security co-operation with Ireland is unacceptable. This is not in the interest of Northern Ireland or the Union.”

Kit Malthouse, the policing minister, has insisted that there is still a chance of finding a deal. He told BBC Breakfast: “We’re reaching a critical point — if there’s ever a time for jaw-jaw rather than war-war, this is it.”

However, attention is already turning in some European capitals to the length and conditions of a Brexit delay that Mr Johnson will be compelled to seek under the Benn act. While some MPs are hoping for a long delay — potentially until the summer — that will enable a second referendum, at least one influential EU government is considering a much shorter delay to force the issue. Under this scenario the timing would be too short for Mr Johnson to hold a general election but would give EU nations some time to prepare for no-deal.

John Bercow, the Speaker, has called the Benn act the “most logical consequence if a deal isn’t agreed”. He also attacked Brexiteers who have voiced criticism over the legislation and branded it a “surrender bill”. “I thought the Brexiteers were in favour of taking back control of parliament being in the driving seat? Well, they can’t have it both ways,” he told CNN.

France, Belgium, Austria, Spain and the Netherlands are among EU nations growing impatient with British Remain campaigners’ influence over key figures like Mr Tusk.

Yesterday a poll of six European countries found that voters were opposed to offering Britain any extension beyond October 31. In France, 57 per cent of the public rejected any extension, rising to 66 per cent of voters in Germany.

Last night the longest session in parliament’s history ended after the traditional prorogation ceremony. It will return on Monday with a Queen’s Speech to announce the government’s legislative programme.