Brexit negotiations

[Scott-Copywriter]

EU have now agreed the deal.

Let's see if our parliament agrees to it too.

Labour luckily enough doesn't control its MPs very well and they can follow a great example of voting their conscience even when the party leader wishes them to vote a particular way.

The SNP will vote against they have said, as will the DUP and Greens. Haven't yet heard the latest for the Lib Dems. And some of the Conservatives will also vote against the deal.

Its anyone's guess as to whether the deal is agreed or not.

It's not looking good.

As it stands now, it's not that May would be only a few MPs short. She'd be quite far short.

There will need to be a significant shift in:

1). Brexiteer MPs accepting the deal because they're fearful there might be a second referendum that stops Brexit altogether.

2). Remain MPs accepting the deal because they think a second referendum is too unlikely and are fearful of no deal.

But this is where May's problem lies. They're two hugely opposing messages where it's almost impossible to avoid contradiction. The only strategy she's really got, which she seems to be using, is to send mixed messages to create general uncertainty over what would happen if the deal is rejected. It's not very effective though.

But what I have noticed is the government increasingly trying to get messages about this deal across to the public. It makes me wonder if she's getting the foundations in place in case a "final say" referendum does happen in the event of political deadlock.

If that does happen, the question is what the referendum options would be. I think she'd be inclined to go with a choice between the deal or no deal. That's a big gamble though considering public sentiment towards the deal.

Note also how May's rhetoric has shifted ever so slightly today. She's gone from saying "there will not be a second referendum" to "there should not be a second referendum". That will be a very specific choice of words.

 

[Mr D]

It's not looking good.

As it stands now, it's not that May would be only a few MPs short. She'd be quite far short.

There will need to be a significant shift in:

1). Brexiteer MPs accepting the deal because they're fearful there might be a second referendum that stops Brexit altogether.

2). Remain MPs accepting the deal because they think a second referendum is too unlikely and are fearful of no deal.

But this is where May's problem lies. They're two hugely opposing messages where it's almost impossible to avoid contradiction. The only strategy she's really got, which she seems to be using, is to send mixed messages to create general uncertainty over what would happen if the deal is rejected. It's not very effective though.

But what I have noticed is the government increasingly trying to get messages about this deal across to the public. It makes me wonder if she's getting the foundations in place in case a "final say" referendum does happen in the event of political deadlock.

If that does happen, the question is what the referendum options would be. I think she'd be inclined to go with a choice between the deal or no deal. That's a big gamble though considering public sentiment towards the deal.

Note also how May's rhetoric has shifted ever so slightly today. She's gone from saying "there will not be a second referendum" to "there should not be a second referendum". That will be a very specific choice of words.

Good points.

The media war is fought first - and words do matter when it comes time to defend actions or challenge what someone else claims.
The wording as you say may well be specific and chosen carefully.

So no backtracking, no sudden change of mind - maybe a gradual move towards opening up a deal even.
'You vote with me on this deal and I'll not challenge a vote on a 2nd referendum' perhaps.

A lot does now depend on the Labour MPs who aren't necessarily going to follow the party leader. Which he should be used to, having not followed his party leader hundreds of times himself.
Some parties we know are going to oppose or are pretty sure they are going to oppose. The two big parties are mixed in reaction - and many MPs are vulnerable in a general election if they go against what the people in their area want. Or even against what the local party voters want - deselection is an option.

We live in interesting times.

 

[KM-Tiger]

But this is where May's problem lies. They're two hugely opposing messages where it's almost impossible to avoid contradiction.

She has created an almost impossible situation. And wasted 2 years it seems. In the last month Tusk tweeted that a Canada+ deal was possible, and always has been, why has that been ignored?

If that was in place, I think most leavers (and many others) would accept compromise in the withdrawal agreement as long as May's own red lines were not crossed.

I'm still disturbed by that fact that she appears to have conspired with the civil service, bypassing both the referendum and our elected representatives to put forward this appalling deal. We desperately need a PM that can in some measure unite this country of ours to move forward. Not divide us even further.

Rumour has it that only 2 more letters are needed. Come on Conservatives, do the right thing! Please!

 

[Mr D]

The Lib Dems should vote against as their policy is Remain.

The 3 big questions:

Has the Project Fear about (pro-Leave) accept this or face No Brexit and (pro-Remain) accept this or leave with No Deal had any effect?

How many Tories are prepared to risk a Corbyn government?

How many Labour are afraid to risk a Corbyn government?

Remain isn't an option at this point.

I don't think any tories are that worried about a Corbyn government at the moment. Labour MPs might be....

 

[KM-Tiger]

Remain isn't an option at this point.

Are you sure?

I thought we were awaiting a legal judgement as to whether Art 50 can be rescinded.

 

[Mr D]

She has created an almost impossible situation. And wasted 2 years it seems. In the last month Tusk tweeted that a Canada+ deal was possible, and always has been, why has that been ignored?

If that was in place, I think most leavers (and many others) would accept compromise in the withdrawal agreement as long as May's own red lines were not crossed.

I'm still disturbed by that fact that she appears to have conspired with the civil service, bypassing both the referendum and our elected representatives to put forward this appalling deal. We desperately need a PM that can in some measure unite this country of ours to move forward. Not divide us even further.

Rumour has it that only 2 more letters are needed. Come on Conservatives, do the right thing! Please!

Canada plus may be an option - but is it what the government want?
And it ignores NI border... our major sticking issue.


Not sure how she's bypassing the referendum. We are following this?

Should the United Kingdom remain a member of the European Union or leave the European Union?

Which particular part of that is not being followed?

Certainly not bypassing my elected representative. There's a vote in parliament due.

 

[Mr D]

Are you sure?

I thought we were awaiting a legal judgement as to whether Art 50 can be rescinded.

Once we have a legal judgement and we have an MP then put forwards a bill to remain - then it will be an option.
Currently no one is putting that forward, the Lib Dems have a position on this. An opposition position don't forget, not a policy of government.

 

[Newchodge]

Do I not turn up, or spoil the paper which is the nearest you can get to recording an abstention.

I always think not turning up indicates a complete lack of interest in the result. I have, on more than one occasion, written 'None of them' or 'I don't understand the question' (for a regional assembly). I don't think I have ever not turned up when I was able.

 

[Deleted member 59730]

I think she'd be inclined to go with a choice between the deal or no deal.

Riots in the streets if she does. The reason it is called a Peoples vote is so that it is not a Tory right wing stitch up like the last one.

 

[Mr D]

Riots in the streets if she does. The reason it is called a Peoples vote is so that it is not a Tory right wing stitch up like the last one.

Oh?
Were you not allowed to vote in the last one for some reason?

Or is it just the fact that other people voted different than you wished them to the cause of your problem with the vote?

 

[Scott-Copywriter]

She has created an almost impossible situation. And wasted 2 years it seems. In the last month Tusk tweeted that a Canada+ deal was possible, and always has been, why has that been ignored?

If that was in place, I think most leavers (and many others) would accept compromise in the withdrawal agreement as long as May's own red lines were not crossed.

I'm still disturbed by that fact that she appears to have conspired with the civil service, bypassing both the referendum and our elected representatives to put forward this appalling deal. We desperately need a PM that can in some measure unite this country of ours to move forward. Not divide us even further.

I don't think she's created the impossible situation. It was just extraordinarily likely to be this difficult given the situation the UK is in.

It's the Irish border again. Nothing works as a guarantee to avoid a hard border other than May's idea. That's just the way it is.

Canada+ could certainly be an option. I have no doubt that the FTA we eventually negotiate will be more favourable than usual. Again, though, this doesn't solve the Irish border problem.

I hear a lot of talk against this deal, but still no viable alternative that guarantees no hard border. Bear in mind too that those pushing for no deal, such as Rees-Mogg, come out with stuff like this in regards to the subject:

https://www.theguardian.com/politic...rish-border-after-brexit-says-jacob-rees-mogg

"There would be our ability, as we had during the Troubles, to have people inspected". The man is so far detached from reality on this topic that it's almost shocking.

Look back in hindsight at Cameron's decision to provide a referendum, and it's clear that no deal was never a feasible option. It was always going to be a choice between staying put or having something akin to May's deal. Talk of no deal over the past two years was just a bluff during negotiations with the EU (which, to be frank, they probably saw right through).

Rumour has it that only 2 more letters are needed. Come on Conservatives, do the right thing! Please!

What's that going to solve though?

The chance of Conservative MPs voting in a new leader who would be open to leaving without a deal is effectively zero. In fact, the chance of May being booted out in a no-confidence vote is close enough to zero as well.

According to recent calculations there are around 250 Tory MPs who will back the deal, and perhaps around 60 arch-Brexiteers who want to reject it. When it comes to anything radically changing, the maths doesn't add up.

If I were you, as painful as it probably is, I'd now seriously start considering whether you'd prefer to accept the deal, or just remain in the EU, if the opportunity to have a say does arise.

 

[KM-Tiger]

The reason it is called a Peoples vote is so that it is not a Tory right wing stitch up like the last one.

And I thought it was because only dogs, cats, and fridge magnets voted last time.

But how on earth can the question Leave the EU or not Leave the EU be a right wing stitch up?

 

[KM-Tiger]

If I were you, as painful as it probably is, I'd now seriously start considering whether you'd prefer to accept the deal, or just remain in the EU, if the opportunity to have a say does arise.

I answered that some posts back.

If that's the choice then even as a leaver I would vote remain.

2019 will bring a new EU parliament and Commission. The make up of that parliament could be radically different to what it is now. Though the parliament has no power it does have influence, so the possibility of meaningful reform is there.

Optimist? Me?

 

[Deleted member 59730]

If that does happen, the question is what the referendum options would be. I think she'd be inclined to go with a choice between the deal or no deal.

But how on earth can the question Leave the EU or not Leave the EU be a right wing stitch up?

Obviously you read Scott's post differently.

 

[Scott-Copywriter]

I answered that some posts back.

If that's the choice then even as a leaver I would vote remain.

2019 will bring a new EU parliament and Commission. The make up of that parliament could be radically different to what it is now. Though the parliament has no power it does have influence, so the possibility of meaningful reform is there.

Optimist? Me?

I think this fear of what the EU will turn into is hugely overblown. At the end of the day, what the EU actually does is decided by the European Parliament and its elected MEPs across the 28 member states. The EU is the union of members, and they control its path.

There seems to be this idea that while the UK is aghast at all sorts of things, all the other member states are keen to strip away more and more of their rights until they have no power at all. I'd call that highly unlikely, and they can't be forced to do so either.

And, of course, every member state, including ourselves, can walk out the door at any time.

In some respects, we should also hope that the EU keeps its strength and influence. The world is just as much of a superpower struggle as it always was, but now it's a three-way split between the US, EU and China, and we can continue to have a seat at the table with the interests of our continent properly represented.

 

[Cobby]

Unless you are legally trained you a probably wasting your time.

The Spectator has a very good summary of points, and replies from Downing St.

A Leaver recommending deferring to experts, well now I've seen everything!

Meanwhile in the Eurozone, the politburo is preparing to 'discipline' the democratically-elected govt of Italy for daring to draw up a budget that could well help Italy get back on its feet. Hats off to the Italians for telling the politburo where to go.

The EU is taking action to help protect the Eurozone - something Italy agreed to in signing up and, if they were in a stronger position and saw another member doing the same thing, would be in favour of such action.

Well that's a nice easy one.

Leave the EU, institutions, single market, customs union, jurisdiction of the ECJ.
Have free trade deal that would enable EU countries to continue to sell to us tariff free and vice versa, including services.
Rejoin certain EU agencies. eg Erasmus, security, and science things.

So, you'd like the benefits of the EU but without any of the responsibilities, all while remaining strongly nationalist?

Shame we were lied to about the implications on sovereignty.

Only you weren't. It was made pretty clear at the time that it was also a political project. And also that it was a vote for life, yet here we are.

I'm curious though...if you felt lied to (even in the absence of lies) about the last referendum and clearly believe there is illegitimacy about it to be discussed, why are you so comfortable with the result of this one given not only the blatant lies but also criminality and outside influence?

 

[Cobby]

I'm not a huge fan of this deal but I don't get this level of hostility.

This is about doing Brexit in a way that has the best chance of mitigating the damage while satisfying the issue of the Irish border.

The EU were clear about their red lines from day one and even before the result, any rational assessment told us what those red lines would be.

Cameron and then May led governments full of bluster about British exceptionalism and they drew their red lines as such; the moment they did that we were always going to end up in this three-way split - No Deal, The Bad Deal or No Brexit.

It's clear now that "no deal" has been a bluff all along. It's too damaging, and MPs know it. May talked it up during the EU negotiations to bend the EU's hand, and now she's got a deal, suddenly they barely mention it any more. Heck, her cabinet is even starting to hint at the possibility of no Brexit to try to get the hardline Brexiteers to play ball.

In addition to this May has also spent the past few days pushing a couple of sound-bites:
"we could end up with No Deal", and "we'll be back to square one", two scaremongering quotes designed to gin up support amongst Remainers and, well, everyone else who is sick of talking and hearing about Brexit.

So she's pushing on each demographic with a different reality and she's still using the lies about "Brexit Dividends" for the NHS.

The whole thing is frankly incredible.

 

[Cobby]

And yet the turnout on the referendum was bigger than any general election.

No it wasn't. Please try to be accurate with your talking points.

 

[Cobby]

The AG is expected to announce that yes, Article 50 can be unilaterally revoked. This will take the pressure off MPs should May put the WA to a second vote.

The government has used SIX QC's to try and prevent this advice being available to parliament.

 

[KM-Tiger]

Only you weren't. It was made pretty clear at the time that it was also a political project. And also that it was a vote for life, yet here we are.

No point going over this ground again. I speak from first hand experience, having been of voting age at that time. But was not politically very aware back then..

 

[KM-Tiger]

Project Fear in full swing again today.

First Hammond and then Carney discrediting the BoE yet again. Who believes Treasury forecasts any more? Or that BoE extreme scenarios have any relation to real life.

Tomorrow? There is a handy guide here to see what will be in the media up to 10th Dec.

 

[Clodbuster]

Cobby - your glass must be pretty much empty by now.

 

[Cobby]

No point going over this ground again. I speak from first hand experience, having been of voting age at that time. But was not politically very aware back then..

Well the Prime Minister at the time spoke about it also being political and I've posted a news article earlier in the thread from the time saying the same thing, so it's reasonable to assume the information was there. It's forgivable to be an uninformed voter but 40 year old memories aren't facts.

I have also spoken to people who claimed they were told it was a "once in a lifetime vote", yet here you are, wanting to re-run the vote and overturn "the will of the people"...

Project Fear in full swing again today.

First Hammond and then Carney discrediting the BoE yet again. Who believes Treasury forecasts any more?

What you're saying here is: "Who believes economic forecasts that are compiled based on verifiable evidence, by experts with plenty of experience, any more?"

Not Brexiters, obviously. Unless you're talking about Patrick "Unicorn Dreamer" Minford, then it's all "listen to the facts!*"

* - not facts.

 

[Cobby]

Cobby - your glass must be pretty much empty by now.

On the contrary!

The two options for Brexit are "No Deal"/Cliff-edge, and May's Withdrawal Agreement.
The evidence against Brexit is now overwhelming. There are no financial benefits to it, there are no economic benefits to it, there are no political benefits to it and there are no social benefits to it.

Even Theresa May has dropped all arguments of principle at this point and deflected calls for a People's Vote using procedure, saying "there isn't time to have a second referendum."

The BBC are finally reporting the risks of Brexit.

John McDonnell has come out and said a People's Vote is "inevitable", with "all options on the table", including 'Remain'.

MPs seem to be publicly acknowledging the fact that "No Deal" would be an utter catastrophe that must not be allowed to happen.

It's the most optimistic I've been for my nation in two years...

 

[simon field]

I'm curious, which arguments do you find hard to take seriously, and why?

Literally, all of them - because nobody knows what will happen in the future see?

They can't even agree which TV channel to have their little mass-debate on now!

It's been fascinating seeing the tories destroying themselves over their petty differences, I reckon Mr Corbyn will be PM by this time next year and then the whole thing can start all over again (oh joy of joys)

 

[Mr D]

Literally, all of them - because nobody knows what will happen in the future see?

They can't even agree which TV channel to have their little mass-debate on now!

It's been fascinating seeing the tories destroying themselves over their petty differences, I reckon Mr Corbyn will be PM by this time next year and then the whole thing can start all over again (oh joy of joys)

It would be interesting watching him try to run a government when the idea of MPs disagreeing with the party leader is enshrined in Corbyn over the years. So the MPs just have to stick to their principles despite what the party leader wants and they are copying his stance.

I don't think he'll win - he hasn't done great in the polls recently. Despite the chaos of recent months where he should be showing much better in the polls he isn't.
If the Tories can avoid a leadership contest they have a good chance of winning next general election too.

 

[simon field]

It would be interesting watching him try to run a government when the idea of MPs disagreeing with the party leader is enshrined in Corbyn over the years. So the MPs just have to stick to their principles despite what the party leader wants and they are copying his stance.

I don't think he'll win - he hasn't done great in the polls recently. Despite the chaos of recent months where he should be showing much better in the polls he isn't.
If the Tories can avoid a leadership contest they have a good chance of winning next general election too.

I disagree. It's early days yet and there's lots of time & plenty opportunities for the tories to really grind their residence over this whole messy spectacle into the public's psyche!

They've always been slimy and they conserve nothing, so at the very least a change of name, approach, and attitude may just see them cling on for a little longer but they're doomed I tell ye, doomed!

 

[Cobby]

Literally, all of them - because nobody knows what will happen in the future see?

"yeah, but if you think about it, you can't really prove anything, because, like, existence is subjective"

It's cool if you can't do specifics (there's really very little defence of Brexit available at this point anyway) but that's how your hand-waving reply reads.

 

[Mr D]

I disagree. It's early days yet and there's lots of time & plenty opportunities for the tories to really grind their residence over this whole messy spectacle into the public's psyche!

They've always been slimy and they conserve nothing, so at the very least a change of name, approach, and attitude may just see them cling on for a little longer but they're doomed I tell ye, doomed!

You don't think 8 years is time enough to grind?

Winning 3 general elections in a row, twice - something the other modern parties have trouble with in Britain. Winning a 4th general election is possible based on current multiple polls.
Its not as if there's a decent opposition.

 

[simon field]

"yeah, but if you think about it, you can't really prove anything, because, like, existence is subjective"

It's cool if you can't do specifics (there's really very little defence of Brexit available at this point anyway) but that's how your hand-waving reply reads.

You're right, I can't do specifics, because I'm guessing too, just like you and everybody else!

(there's really very little to suggest I'm defending brexit (or anything else)) but hey, knock yourself out.

 

[Cobby]

You're right, I can't do specifics, because I'm guessing too, just like you and everybody else!

(there's really very little to suggest I'm defending brexit (or anything else)) but hey, knock yourself out.

So you stand for nothing in particular, are arguing in favour of nothing in particular, and you will never actually do either in the future because any form of speculation is pointless and nothing can be known?

How do you even get up in the morning with the weight of all that not knowing...

 

[Scott-Copywriter]

Searching for "Brexit" in Google now reveals a government-funded Adwords campaign promoting May's deal.

The wheels on a second referendum are now in motion. May isn't stupid. She knows the deal is unlikely to pass, and targeting the British public is unlikely to change the minds of MPs. No deal is also highly unlikely, as is a chance to renegotiate.

Arguably the only realistic opportunity on the table (unless she can spook MPs into approving the deal with a second Commons vote) is to put the decision, once again, in the hands of the public.

If this happens, the question is what the options will be. It would be a huge gamble to only allow a choice between the deal or no deal. But I'm sure she will have the data on public opinion to be able to make a better judgement call nearer the time. If the deal has a very good chance of winning the popular vote, it may boil down to deal vs no deal. If not, then all options, including remain, could be made available.

I say "she" will have the data, but of course, it's a distinct possibility that May wouldn't make the decision. If she resigns due to a failed Commons vote (or two) then the next PM would make the call. If that's the case, the Tory leadership contest could boil down choosing a new PM that either would or would not include remain as a referendum option.

However, don't assume that only pro-EU candidates would advocate for remain to be included. A number of Brexit supporters have suggested that this deal is worse than staying put. If they genuinely, genuinely believe that, and a no-deal/deal referendum would make the deal very likely to be accepted, they may include remain to help prevent what they'd see as a worse case scenario (not that there's any guarantee at all that remain would win, of course).

I think a second referendum is an increasingly likely possibility now. Whether it includes the option to remain, however, is a very different story.

 

[Mr D]

Searching for "Brexit" in Google now reveals a government-funded Adwords campaign promoting May's deal.

The wheels on a second referendum are now in motion. May isn't stupid. She knows the deal is unlikely to pass, and targeting the British public is unlikely to change the minds of MPs. No deal is also highly unlikely, as is a chance to renegotiate.

Arguably the only realistic opportunity on the table (unless she can spook MPs into approving the deal with a second Commons vote) is to put the decision, once again, in the hands of the public.

If this happens, the question is what the options will be. It would be a huge gamble to only allow a choice between the deal or no deal. But I'm sure she will have the data on public opinion to be able to make a better judgement call nearer the time. If the deal has a very good chance of winning the popular vote, it may boil down to deal vs no deal. If not, then all options, including remain, could be made available.

I say "she" will have the data, but of course, it's a distinct possibility that May wouldn't make the decision. If she resigns due to a failed Commons vote (or two) then the next PM would make the call. If that's the case, the Tory leadership contest could boil down choosing a new PM that either would or would not include remain as a referendum option.

However, don't assume that only pro-EU candidates would advocate for remain to be included. A number of Brexit supporters have suggested that this deal is worse than staying put. If they genuinely, genuinely believe that, and a no-deal/deal referendum would make the deal very likely to be accepted, they may include remain to help prevent what they'd see as a worse case scenario (not that there's any guarantee at all that remain would win, of course).

I think a second referendum is an increasingly likely possibility now. Whether it includes the option to remain, however, is a very different story.

The same question could be used again.

A new question with two answers could be used.

Problems come if they try and split the vote, giving 3 or more options to vote on.

So we are looking at June? July? For a possible 2nd referendum.
Maybe even September?

 

[simon field]

So you stand for nothing in particular, are arguing in favour of nothing in particular, and you will never actually do either in the future because any form of speculation is pointless and nothing can be known?

How do you even get up in the morning with the weight of all that not knowing...

No, it's more a case of I can equally understand and sympathize with both sides of the debate, so I don't feel polarized and don't worry about anything!

highly entertaining

 

[Jeff FV]

A Scottish newspaper was barred from the press event at Theresa May’s recent visit to Scotland to “sell” the deal to the public.

Regardless of your opinion on Brexit, I find it a rather sinister turn that our PM is now barring the free press from her events.

https://pressgazette.co.uk/scotland...-theresa-may-snubs-paper-during-brexit-visit/

 

[Newchodge]

Searching for "Brexit" in Google now reveals a government-funded Adwords campaign promoting May's deal.

The wheels on a second referendum are now in motion. May isn't stupid. She knows the deal is unlikely to pass, and targeting the British public is unlikely to change the minds of MPs. No deal is also highly unlikely, as is a chance to renegotiate.

Arguably the only realistic opportunity on the table (unless she can spook MPs into approving the deal with a second Commons vote) is to put the decision, once again, in the hands of the public.

If this happens, the question is what the options will be. It would be a huge gamble to only allow a choice between the deal or no deal. But I'm sure she will have the data on public opinion to be able to make a better judgement call nearer the time. If the deal has a very good chance of winning the popular vote, it may boil down to deal vs no deal. If not, then all options, including remain, could be made available.

I say "she" will have the data, but of course, it's a distinct possibility that May wouldn't make the decision. If she resigns due to a failed Commons vote (or two) then the next PM would make the call. If that's the case, the Tory leadership contest could boil down choosing a new PM that either would or would not include remain as a referendum option.

However, don't assume that only pro-EU candidates would advocate for remain to be included. A number of Brexit supporters have suggested that this deal is worse than staying put. If they genuinely, genuinely believe that, and a no-deal/deal referendum would make the deal very likely to be accepted, they may include remain to help prevent what they'd see as a worse case scenario (not that there's any guarantee at all that remain would win, of course).

I think a second referendum is an increasingly likely possibility now. Whether it includes the option to remain, however, is a very different story.

Trouble with that is the timescale. I don't see how you can get a referendum agreed and held in less than 4 months. So Article 50 would have to be suspended or withdrawn or whatever. If it isn't we definitely won't have the option of going back on current terms, so the referendum would have to include options like return, even if we have to take the Euro, return, even if we have to be part of Schengen. Which completely changes the complexion of things.

The MPs should simply do their jobs and act in what is in the best interests of the country. That doesn't need a referendum.

 

[Mr D]

Trouble with that is the timescale. I don't see how you can get a referendum agreed and held in less than 4 months. So Article 50 would have to be suspended or withdrawn or whatever. If it isn't we definitely won't have the option of going back on current terms, so the referendum would have to include options like return, even if we have to take the Euro, return, even if we have to be part of Schengen. Which completely changes the complexion of things.

The MPs should simply do their jobs and act in what is in the best interests of the country. That doesn't need a referendum.

The MPs disagree, on ideological grounds or what people have convinced them of, regarding what is best for the country.

You and I would probably disagree on what is best for the country in some issues (not all), can we expect the MPs elected by thousands of people with their own ideas and beliefs regarding Brexit to be any different?

I'd be guessing closer to 6 months plus for a 2nd referendum from when one is agreed in parliament. 4 months as you say would be a minimum what with legislation, agreement of question or questions, voting through parliament etc then royal assent then campaigning.
And we have Christmas break coming up - they get longer off than some of us ever get.

 

[Deleted member 59730]

Regardless of your opinion on Brexit, I find it a rather sinister turn that our PM is now barring the free press from her events.

She did this during the election campaign. Locked a journalist and photographer in a cupboard at a factory just up the road from me.

 

[simon field]

Are they still in there?

 

[Scott-Copywriter]

Trouble with that is the timescale. I don't see how you can get a referendum agreed and held in less than 4 months. So Article 50 would have to be suspended or withdrawn or whatever. If it isn't we definitely won't have the option of going back on current terms, so the referendum would have to include options like return, even if we have to take the Euro, return, even if we have to be part of Schengen. Which completely changes the complexion of things.

The MPs should simply do their jobs and act in what is in the best interests of the country. That doesn't need a referendum.

It would require an Article 50 extension, yes. I think the EU would be willing to grant it.

Personally I think the option to remain a member on the same terms as before would be granted. The EU doesn't want the UK to leave, and they will know that toying around with the terms of staying in the EU would almost certainly cause the public to vote leave once again.

There's already a good chance that with the three options on the table, the public would vote for May's deal instead of remaining. I think that goes up to near certainty if the EU plays games like that, and they know it, so the choice on their side would be between trying to get us to stay, or making sure we leave for good.