You are exactly right. May has demanded personal control of the process & negotiations. Until last night she has never agreed to any significant changes in her stance when she voted against her own deal. Even she has finally found her nose and smelt the coffee! Mays deal -or any other variation- is not going to pass into law until there is a majority vote for it. If the government cannot offer MPs an acceptable deal and get a majority vote for it by the 27th, expect a vote to extend the discussion.
So............. Are we leaving or aren't we? So far, it seems we aren't..........or we are...........
The head of the WTO did say he would ensure there would be no issues and a streamline transition - but hey, let's listen to project fear and head to the supermarkets (Tesco preferably as they won't run out like the others) or run to the hills and join Finm Really hope we leave on WTO terms for the sake of this thread alone, it will be interesting if nothing else
First few lines state (House of Commons voting last night "nothing less than the biggest political crisis on the island since World War II" ) have they forgot who won back then, we don't give up so easily.
Two and a half years of May attempting to have her cake and eat it. "Leave" whilst actually Remaining. Working out the language of a deal with the EU whilst ensuring Project Fear worked in the background, softening everyone up. EU wants us to Remain, most MPs wanted us to Remain. When it became apparent that Leavers would not wilt, the WA was needed. Leaving whilst tethering us to the EU and thereby ensuring an eventual return. No other interpretation of the past 2.5 years makes any sense to me. An alternative explanation must include: Why the UK argued for a deal with No-Deal effectively off of the table throughout - fatally weakening the UK negotiation? Why no "progress" on a deal until the past few months and then an execrable effort during the run-down-the-clock phase? Why a ridiculous succession of Brexit (and other) Ministers who needed sacking/to resign from their posts? Why May's WA deal? What in the actual fuck was that meant to be? Even MPs could see it was awful, record margin of defeat for May. Why the insistence that May's Government control the entire Brexit process, until Gina Miller's legal action threw a monkey wrench into the works? Why no publishing of legal advice in respect of the Backdrop and other aspects of the WA? A Government which attempting to reach the best possible deal with the EU over Brexit, in the face of the EU's known intransigence and clear unwillingness to have the UK leave it, would not have looked anything like May's government.
The British don't take kindly to scaremongering, blackmail and threats, but still they try it on with us. Upon reflection after June 2016, the Remain campaign admitted it was a mistake to go for project fear and that it backfired on them. So what do they do after that? Move onto Project Hysteria on steroids and expect a different response from the British public. I am at the point where I'm turning the news off after about 2 mins of watching it now, such is the propaganda.
It was the Russians and Americans wasn't it? So, you have been editing your own house on Zoopla, then?
Stronger together how? Stronger together as in one of the governments took over control of the other 23 countries? Or stronger together, as in 24 separate countries cooperating with each other, each with their own sovereignty? Asking for ah .... sane people.
At no point did I say you were stupid. You probably understood the issue... With confidence though I can state that people from both sides will have interpreted things in varying ways. Please do not deny that Canada +, Canada ++, Norway options, a new deal (they will be desperate to trade with us, sound familiar?) and more were NEVER talked about ..... In which case the Brexit picture could and does look different to different folks.
The UK and 24 other countries combined are not refered to as WE, I get it now, the UK lost but the other 24 won on our behalf, now it all makes sense.
Agreed! We should have had two negotiating teams running together; one for the Withdrawal Agreement with the EU, the other with an exit negotiated with WTO transition (led by Digby Jones). Then there would be a clear incentive for the EU to make it a reasonable mutually acceptable deal instead of the non starter we got. Then if it didn't get supported, then we were prepared and ready for the WTO transition.
Nothing about the past two and a half years has shown me that the UK government was at all serious about a genuine Brexit worthy of the name.
