Brexit negotiations
- Thread starter Scott-Copywriter
- Start date
Our governments at the time agreed, there isn't a need to get the voters of a country to agree to every single decision made. I cannot offhand think of any country that does put all parliamentary business to popular votes by the electorate. Be a bit pointless having a parliament in that situation.
Judging by the predictions made over the past 30 months or so I'd suggest we will sign pretty much anything quickly if it will give us a little security, a little sense of tomorrow being very much like today, a little certainty, a trade deal no matter how bad or what is palmed off on us.
Maybe not this government - a future parliament say next year or later could.
I think you and I both know that no matter what government signs, actual impact for the man on the street could be quite some time later. Good or bad.
Upvote
0
(2) Being either Mays' agreement or maybe 'Norway - both are vastly different choices to Remain.
If you're looking for mono-causal effects, then probably not much. But when such huge movements take place they are very rarely on the wrong side of history, as the Iraq march proved. If you can countenance a more complex system, you'll know that keeping a conversation in the public eye does a lot of good. That's a whole other topic though.
And would they be doing that if nobody had made it clear they had interests in the process (Leavers, Remainers, etc)? Do you believe if everyone had simply shrugged, said nothing and left the government to it they'd have inevitably ended up not doing Brexit as you suggest?
Upvote
0
We've had 2.5 years and shown that all of the outcomes promised by the Leave campaigns to be unfeasible, financial predictions about events after the vote but before leaving largely came to pass and in that time businesses (as is their legal responsibility) have analysed in excruciating detail the risks to their business and have, almost unanimously warned of the risks of each Brexit outcome.
To suggest that we don't know anything more than we did in 2016 isn't just blinkered, it's wrong.
Are you suggesting they all voted? Or that they all voted a particular way? Your argument here isn't very clear.
For anyone else reading, this is a classic example of what privilege looks and sounds like.
Upvote
0
T
The Byre
I am a businessman. I run a business. I run a business by working with people. My primary job is to judge people. It is people that make a business work. You can't run a business without people. Never mind contracts, buildings, machines and systems. Never mind money. First things first - you need people!
If I were to say to you, I am going to start and manage a F1 racing team, you may doubt the voracity of that statement when you discover that I have neither the experience nor the know-how to do such a thing. You would look at me and ask what have I been doing until now - and the answer would have to be 'Nothing to do with auto-racing!' You would come to the very obvious conclusion that I would not be capable of such an enterprise.
There are many people in the UK today who would be capable of negotiating Britain's exit from the EU. Clever people who speak English, French and German, who understand international and EU law, people who know the workings of the EU inside-out. People with the intelligence, intellect, wisdom and knowledge required to find a way through the quagmire of laws and politicking who could indeed be capable of negotiating a pathway for the UK to leave the EU.
I have met such people many times. The corridors of power in mainland Europe and the European Commission are filled with such people. But non of them support Brexit.
The front benches of both major political parties contain no such people. The civil service contains no such people.
If you want to get something done, you must have people who have the knowledge, the ability and the desire to get that thing done.
As Sir Toby Belch said "if he were opened and you find so much blood in his liver as will clog the foot of a flea, I'll eat the rest of the anatomy."
He could have been talking about the intellect of the UK government - or indeed of Her Majesty's Loyal Opposition. And that is why I am so sure that Britain is going precisely (and counting from left to right) nowhere!
Upvote
0
D
Deleted member 59730
Why are the government being so coy about the legal advice? I think it might have to do with the EU not trusting any future UK government. Do you remember the sudden hardening of attitudes when Johnson and Rees-Mogg suggested that we could just tear up the bits we didn't like at a later date. I think that since then the EU have acted as if they were dealing with a future populist government who couldn't be trusted. And May knows it. And she doesn't want the British public finding out.
Upvote
0
- Original Poster
- #4,007
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-46446694
It seems we're about to find out.
PS: This is another one we can add to the history books. For the first time ever in the UK, our own government has been found guilty of contempt of Parliament. It really is extraordinary.
Last edited:
Upvote
0
And just like you and others, the government is capable of recruiting such people from overseas to act on our behalf.
Where you don't have the experience, background, contacts etc but need to have such experience on your team then you hire someone who does.
Upvote
0
- Original Poster
- #4,009
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/...onservatives-labour-dup-commons-a8666846.html
This is hugely significant. Arguably more important than the vote on the Brexit deal itself given the current situation.
An upcoming Commons motion will set out the framework for the deal debate. However, Grieve has slotted in an amendment that, if passed, will give MPs the power to decide what happens if/when May's deal is rejected. Currently they have no formal power in that regard.
The Speaker of the House has just accepted the amendment which will be put to a vote, and it now has a pretty good chance of passing due to the opposition, and a number of Tory MPs, supporting it for fairly obvious reasons.
If it does pass, then how we do Brexit, when we do Brexit, and even whether we do Brexit, will be put back in the hands of our MPs.
In my view, we should be preparing for a second referendum of some kind. May's deal will be voted down, no deal will be voted down, and renegotiation will lead nowhere. There's only one option left.
This is hugely significant. Arguably more important than the vote on the Brexit deal itself given the current situation.
An upcoming Commons motion will set out the framework for the deal debate. However, Grieve has slotted in an amendment that, if passed, will give MPs the power to decide what happens if/when May's deal is rejected. Currently they have no formal power in that regard.
The Speaker of the House has just accepted the amendment which will be put to a vote, and it now has a pretty good chance of passing due to the opposition, and a number of Tory MPs, supporting it for fairly obvious reasons.
If it does pass, then how we do Brexit, when we do Brexit, and even whether we do Brexit, will be put back in the hands of our MPs.
In my view, we should be preparing for a second referendum of some kind. May's deal will be voted down, no deal will be voted down, and renegotiation will lead nowhere. There's only one option left.
Upvote
0
No deal can't be voted down.
If May's deal is rejected and the EU don't want to offer another deal then no deal is automatic, we can't reject it, unless we give up on Brexit - but as both Labour and Conservative "support" Brexit who is going to put remain forward?
Upvote
0
The party line of those parties is to support Brexit. That is quite different from every MP in the party following the party line.
Could be one of dozens of Conservative or Labour MPs who put forward a motion to give up on Brexit.
Or an MP from one of the other parties. So far has anyone chosen to do that?
Upvote
0
- Original Poster
- #4,013
I can tell you the least likely thing to happen right now, by quite some distance: Parliament will not let the UK leave the EU without a deal. There are more than enough MPs in the opposition, and within the Tory ranks, to make that an impossibility (barring an unforeseen twist of epic proportions).
True, MPs can't technically vote down no deal, but something else will be voted in as an alternative if it comes to that.
There are a number of possible avenues. They vote to cancel Brexit (extremely unlikely), they ask for an Article 50 extension, they try to renegotiate for "clarifications", they sign us up to the EFTA, they put the choice to another referendum (with or without remain as an option). So on and so forth.
I don't know what will happen in that regard, but what I do know is that no deal, and the leverage that had, are no longer on the table.
Upvote
0
Well that could be that May resigns or is forced out. Though whoever steps into those shoes will have an unholy mess to sort out.
I don't know whether it's events or a conspiracy, but things do seem to be moving to a point where remain looks like the best option, even for leavers.
I start to think that The Byre is right, and it won't happen. At least not now.
Upvote
0
Thinking about it - being forced to publish the details - is this part of the same media strategy leading to a particular end the PM has in mind?
She's got to have been advised what would happen in parliament. What part of the process she is running are we not seeing?
Upvote
0
Michael? Boris? Jacob? Someone else? Take your pick who you want as PM, though of course its down to MPs and eventually party members to choose who will be the party leader. The public are stuck with that PM for at least a little while then.
May's biggest visible asset in keeping her job is who is likely to take it afterwards.
Upvote
0
If May's deal is rejected and Parliament has rejected no deal then the government has 2 options. Negotiate a better deal or withdraw Article 50. Anything else would be the second contempt of Parliament in Parliament's history.
Upvote
0
The other side have already said they will not negotiate a better deal.
So is just one option left at that point?
Perhaps withdraw article 50 then call immediately for a general election?
Leave it to some future government to start the process again later, ignoring all problems that are known to date of course. Or not start the process again.
The Labour and Conservative manifestos in such a general election could make interesting reading. As would the choices of MPs to stand with that manifesto - could the more rabid elements of either side in the Brexit issue stand for a party whose manifesto they so publicly reject?
Upvote
0
D
Deleted member 59730
Brexit will affect adversely......
1.5 million British citizens living in Europe
Over 1 million British pensioners living abroad.
All the EU citizens living in the UK.
All those people who take holidays in the EU.
All those people whose sons, daughters and grandchildren hope to travel, study or live in the EU.
All those people working for companies which sell abroad
All those people working for companies which import materials or parts.
All those people who eat imported food.
All those people who need medicines.
etc etc etc
Unless you are a superbly fit self sufficient farmer with no children and very limited horizons Brexit will affect you adversely.
Upvote
0
- Original Poster
- #4,020
This could absolutely be engineered by the PM. I wouldn't be hugely surprised if it is.
The only thing that makes me doubt this is her misjudgement with that snap election. It's possible that she could have done it to intentionally lose seats but I find that much harder to believe.
One thing May is highly likely to know though is that her deal will fail the Commons vote. She will have already planned out what will happen when it does fail. That's why I think the Government has ramped up the marketing towards the public when it comes to the benefits of the deal. She's laying the groundwork for the strong possibility of a second referendum.
Upvote
0
At the time of calling that election, polls were showing a majority of around 100, which would have put her in a comfortable position.
The reason that majority did not materialise was a very poor campaign, and the simple fact that people don't warm to her and therefore vote for her party.
A GE now would be very interesting. Now leave voters have seen the extent of her treachery, I think it's impossible to predict what would happen.
Upvote
0
- Original Poster
- #4,022
Even then, I can't see much changing. There would be a leadership contest, but I can't see how any of the no deal Brexiteers could get anywhere near winning that.
You also have to wonder who would try to run. It's easy for people to talk the talk when they're on the sidelines, but much more difficult when they've got the top job and become wholly responsible for their words and actions. I suspect a lot of MPs talking down the worries of no deal would not be so confident in taking the UK down that route themselves.
I don't think it's a conspiracy. The Irish border (at least for any politician who takes the situation in Ireland seriously) was always going to throw a spanner in this idea of a clean customs break. May is right. If we want to sign a formal withdrawal deal before March, it's the only realistic option.
And of course, you then have MPs doing their job: trying to do what's in the national interest. There is no clear mandate for a hard Brexit, and they are understandably reluctant to cause all sorts of problems that they'd end up getting the blame for even if they were just following "the will of the people".
As I said before, once Brexit is over, attention will shift back to what's always been top of the agenda: the NHS, austerity, the economy, jobs, wages, public services etc. Brexit doesn't help any of those, and if it does, it won't be for a long, long time yet.
All that being said, I think May's deal does have a good chance of passing, but through a second referendum. I think the attitude of the public has shifted towards staying in the EU, but it's still close. If we had another campaign focusing on leaving the EU which talks about ending freedom of movement and taking control of our laws and money etc, perhaps peppered in with some fear stories about staying in the EU, then Brexit with May's deal could win.
Upvote
0
I think the problem with May's handling of Brexit is that she has just insisted on taking too firm a grip on it within her own party and generally I suppose as well. Many Conservative MP's have just let her get on with it because they do not want the toxic job of leading a party or the country through Brexit times.
However, it need not have been a toxic job in my view. May's almost wilful determination to "get a good deal" has meant that the diplomacy and the international affairs aspects of leaving the EU has almost been ignored. Gibraltar, Northern Ireland, Fishing Rights, freedom of movement etc have always been treated as side-issues by May. They have not been treated as such by the EU. They are top of their agenda. These issues should have been treated by May with the respect that the EU treated them. They might not be particularly important to the most of the UK politicians and electorate in terms of numbers, but they are important to the EU and hence are important to Brexit process.
Last edited:
Upvote
0
There is no evidence for this. We've had a proliferation of selective surveys published recently as part of a concerted campaign to change the referendum result, but any survey that includes a genuine cross-section of society shows the percentages have not changed from the referendum result.
Personally I think the best way forwards is a general election. A second referendum would be an affront to the majority of Brits, an election is the only fair way to proceed.
Upvote
0
- Original Poster
- #4,025
In truth I think she saw all this coming, which is why she tried so hard to avoid it. The Commons was never going to like any deal it was possible to agree on considering the circumstances, so she rolled the dice on being able to get the deal through and deliver Brexit without their approval.
It didn't work, but the situation were in now is not particularly groundbreaking in nature. It's a return to what you would expect to be the default position: Parliament decides, as it does with all laws and decisions of this magnitude.
Upvote
0
T
The Byre
Quite the opposite - she has allowed herself to be criticised by members of her own cabinet. When that happened to Helmut Kohl, he fired every critical voice and made sure that they never got any kind of office, national or regional, ever again. He didn't just remove them from the cabinet, he ended their political careers. The same applied to Margret Thatcher in '81 and the famous 'Night of the Long Hatpin' ridding herself of all of Edward Heath's allies.
It's one thing to allow open discussion around the cabinet table, it is a totally different thing when the likes of Davis and Johnson are briefing against you, behind your back, to the media, but 'off the record'. When members of a team start playing games like that, they need to be not just dismissed, but publicly humiliated "pour encourager les autres!"
Spot-on!
Unfortunately, it is part and parcel of the British 'Body-Politic' to completely fail to understand the rest of Europe and what motivates the rest of Europe. Heath failed to understand when he signed the UK up for the Common Market and all subsequent PMs have managed to grasp the wrong end of the European stick ever since.
Given the impossible position that the government finds itself in and the unbelievable mess that May has managed to create, the very slight movements that have been seen are likely to accelerate, which in turn will make opposition to a 2nd referendum all the more strident.
This pointless nonsense could last for years!
____________________________________________________________
Legal advice is published and shows what we all knew already - that the so-called 'deal' would leave the UK in political and legal limbo, until a subsequent deal was finalised.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-46451970
Upvote
0
When I said she had too great of a grip on Brexit, I meant that she is determined to stay in power and deliver Brexit no matter what. Despite the resignations. Despite the constitutional problems with the proposals that she has agreed with Brussels. It is almost like getting to the finish line of Brexit with her in power has been an end in itself.
The resignations have weakened her, but she sees the fact that she is still in power despite them as a strength. But, you know, the resignations might have weakened her at home, but the real damage that they have done is the damage they have done to her negotiating position in Brussels. It has damaged Brexit for the UK.
Upvote
0
There are some interesting effects that muddy the waters, in the split between Leave/Remain when looking at particular questions (e.g. comparing No Deal vs. May's Proposal, or May's Proposal vs. Remaining). But regardless of your beliefs, there has a pretty significant shift, the last I saw putting voting at 54/46 in favour of Remain but the big swing is the voters' desire for a People's Vote.
I use the term "significant" here in a slightly stronger manner than those who considered a 2% swing in the last referendum to be a significant margin and acceptable margin for radical and unrevocable constitutional change.
A second referendum absolutely would not be an affront, and this is the last (and extremely weak) defence that the pro-Brexit argument seems to have. How can utilising our democratic machinery be seen as undemocratic? The electorate cannot betray themselves. It's fair to say that two years of effort and rigorous investigation into the viability of Brexit after the submission of Article 50, across government and the entire economy, satisfies the 'respect' required of the previous result.
I don't see anyone trying to change the result of 2016; a People's Vote is a separate referendum with a separate topic, a different question and hopefully, in the interests of democracy, a more complete electorate (e.g. UK citizens abroad, 16 & 17 year olds, and even EU citizens who are settled here).
Upvote
0
It's easy to see her loss as simply her loss but it was also largely down to other's gain. A lurch toward Labour occurred as they were seen as the better option for avoiding the catastrophic consequences of Brexit. Obviously in hindsight that's the same unicorn-chasing that has gone on with Brexiteers, but still.
Also:
Literally anyone who makes use of any public service or benefit (smaller economy = less tax take = less funding for services/welfare).
Upvote
0
Also worth noting that UK citizens living in the EU who fail to achieve resident status in their chosen country after Brexit, should they have to return to the UK, had better hope they have a job as currently their non-residency in the UK excludes them from claiming any form of welfare benefit (this is, I believe, down to a concession Cameron managed to get from the EU last time around)...
Upvote
0
You forgot to mention those that showed a shift towards Brexit. I know if a survey appears on Channel 4 or in the Guardian it'll be biased towards its left leaning pro-remain political position, just the same if it appeared in The Mail or Telegraph it'll be more pro-Brexit. But you are right, we all lean towards our natural bias and look for affirmation.
Upvote
0
D
Deleted member 59730
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/...challenge-void-oxford-professor-a8668771.html
We will soon have all those who spout about the "will of the people" having to eat their words.
We will soon have all those who spout about the "will of the people" having to eat their words.
Upvote
0
Any media would be fools to present information that goes against the message they are presenting to their customers.
Which is how we end up with multiple survey results.
Perhaps if the survey companies used a standard question and used the same method of finding responses as each other we'd be able to compare like for like. And the media would trumpet whichever came closest to their individual positions.
Just like we do.
Upvote
0
I see only 30% of a survey want their MP to vote against the deal. I have written to mine to that effect but he seems to be backing the PM. I want a trading deal but I DO NOT want a political deal. Quite frankly I don't care about Ireland having a border - it is not necessary to be so intransigent. The EU political system produces nothing, it is a government without a country that we pay for it to be a parasitic, worthless entity bleeding us of money, nationhood and independence. If we stay in there will come a time when our traditional combatants will have such a tight grip on our testicles that they will squeak loudly.
I read that Churchill said "We are with Europe but not of it. We are linked but not compromised. We are interested and associated but not absorbed. If Britain must choose between Europe and the open sea, she must always choose the open sea"
He did also say "“If, on the other hand, the European trade community were to be permanently restricted to the six nations, the results might be worse than if nothing were done at all – worse for them as well as for us. It would tend not to unite Europe but to divide it – and not only in the economic field.”
I read that Churchill said "We are with Europe but not of it. We are linked but not compromised. We are interested and associated but not absorbed. If Britain must choose between Europe and the open sea, she must always choose the open sea"
He did also say "“If, on the other hand, the European trade community were to be permanently restricted to the six nations, the results might be worse than if nothing were done at all – worse for them as well as for us. It would tend not to unite Europe but to divide it – and not only in the economic field.”
Upvote
0
Upvote
0
- Original Poster
- #4,039
Could you link me to the opinion polls that show a shift towards leave, please?
It's not that I'm sceptical. I just haven't seen any.
Personally I'm going off this poll of polls, which is the average result of the six most recent polls on the matter: https://whatukthinks.org/eu/opinion-polls/euref2-poll-of-polls/
Upvote
0
Latest Articles
-
What I Wish I'd Known Before Using AI in My BusinessSomewhere between the headlines promising AI will transform everything...- Ozzy
- Updated:
-
Is AI Making the Internet Worse?It started with a comment about music. @JEREMY HAWKE , a courier...
- Ozzy
- Updated:
-
The AI Divide: What UKBF Members Really Think in 2026Every few months on UK Business Forums, a thread appears that refuses...
- Ozzy
- Updated:
-
When the Algorithm Gets It Wrong: What eBay's AI Moderation Problem Tells Us About Platform RiskA thread appeared on UKBF this week that, on the surface, looks like a...
- Ozzy
- Updated:
-
Should you crowdfund? A framework for UK founders in 2026Three articles into a series on what crowdfunding actually costs, the...
- Ozzy
- Updated: