Brexit Deal agreed ( updated )

[Mikey1874]

EU (John Claude Juncker) are saying agreement has to be passed by 12 April. If so can get extension to 22 May. 

 

No extension otherwise. 

Edited April 3, 2019 by Mikey1874

[flecktimus]

7 minutes ago, Mikey1874 said:

EU (Donald Tusk) are saying agreement has to be passed by 12 April. If so can get extension to 22 May. 

 

No extension otherwise. 

Juncker just quoted the same

Edited April 3, 2019 by flecktimus

[AlphonseCapone]

4 hours ago, Ibrahim Tall said:

 

"3rd party" sounds bigger than it actually is in practical terms though. 

Labour/Conservatives make up 86% of parliament, if they come to an agreement every other parties vote is irrelevant.

 

Mathematically you are obviously right. But from a political point of view, it would be a masterstroke to involve a party that makes up the majority representation of the second largest country in the UK, a country which voted overwhelmingly against Brexit, a country making a lot of noise about being ignored, a country always on the edge of seeking an independence referendum. 

[Mikey1874]

11 minutes ago, flecktimus said:

Juncker just quoted the same

 

 

[Mikey1874]

 

[coconut doug]

17 hours ago, JamboX2 said:

 

It has customs check points. I call that a fairly non-frictionless border.

Norway is in Shengen and so all Shengen countries can and sometimes do carry out these checks. Obviously each country is entitled to protect its own territorial integrity.

 

 

[Mikey1874]

So calls for a long extension not looking likely

[coconut doug]

22 minutes ago, Dannie Boy said:

https://mobile.twitter.com/BBCPolitics/status/1113401814135607297?ref_src=twsrc^google|twcamp^serp|twgr^tweet

 

Blackford obviously has the ear of Sturgeon!

Perhaps you didn't hear or understand the supplementary.

[Cade]

Here we go, with the Yvette Cooper bill (forcing the PM to seek a long extension) trying to be passed in a single day.

It probably won't be, but it's going to be fun anyways.

[Francis Albert]

I sense in the reaction in at least some of the Remainer media a changing of gears. "People didn't vote for a hard Brexit" to "People didn't vote for a Brexit that is effectively Remain without a vioce". The latter argument is stronger IMO.

[Don Dan]

12 minutes ago, coconut doug said:

Perhaps you didn't hear or understand the supplementary.

 

To late for the hapless Blackford. No meeting eh!?

[Martin_T]

5 minutes ago, Francis Albert said:

I sense in the reaction in at least some of the Remainer media a changing of gears. "People didn't vote for a hard Brexit" to "People didn't vote for a Brexit that is effectively Remain without a vioce". The latter argument is stronger IMO.

 

Meanwhile the Leaver media which includes virtually all of the top selling newspapers in the UK:

 

The Daily Express

The Daily Mail

The Sun

The Daily Telegraph

The Times

The Daily Star

 

Continue to champion a No Deal Brexit despite knowing how disastrous that would be for the UK Economy.

[Francis Albert]

Given the timescales I read the EU as saying pretty clearly - either agree the deal we spent two years negotiating or revoke.

It won't stop the Commons going on negotiating with itself however for the 10 days left.

Edited April 3, 2019 by Francis Albert

[Francis Albert]

5 minutes ago, Martin_T said:

 

Meanwhile the Leaver media which includes virtually all of the top selling newspapers in the UK:

 

The Daily Express

The Daily Mail

The Sun

The Daily Telegraph

The Times

The Daily Star

 

Continue to champion a No Deal Brexit despite knowing how disastrous that would be for the UK Economy.

It is several months since the Mail for one  supported a No Deal Brexit.

Not sure the Times  and Telegraph ever did.

[Don Dan]

For me we need to revoke A50 or at the very least have a second referendum. This shambles is making a mockery of everyone right across the House. 

To go for a second referendum we need to have 3 options No Deal, A Deal (whatever that will be) or Revoke.

Edited April 3, 2019 by Dannie Boy

[Francis Albert]

3 minutes ago, Dannie Boy said:

For me we need to revoke A50 or at the very least have a second referendum. This shambles is making a mockery of everyone right across the House. 

To go for a second referendum we need to have 3 options No Deal, A Deal (whatever that will be) or Revoke.

Split the Leave vote. That'll work.

[Martin_T]

2 minutes ago, Francis Albert said:

It is several months since the Mail for one  supported a No Deal Brexit.

Not sure the Times  and Telegraph ever did.

 

Regardless, this persecution complex you seem to carry about the 'remainer' media, as if there is some sort of under representation of the leave vote, is nonsense.

 

Even the BBC, which is supposed to be balanced, I can't recall the last time that I watched Question Time without the panel and audience being primarily Leave. Indeed they also allowed for the normalization of the extreme views of Farage by allowing him to regularly appear as a guest.

[Martin_T]

1 minute ago, Francis Albert said:

Split the Leave vote. That'll work.

 

Good, I'm all for it.

[Don Dan]

3 minutes ago, Francis Albert said:

Split the Leave vote. That'll work.

 

If there’s a 2nd referendum that’s the best that will happen for leave imo Remain will win it now hands down.

Edited April 3, 2019 by Dannie Boy
Remain will win it.

[Cade]

Brexiteer MPs are trying to stop Parliament from paying the Prime Minster's wages.

Tory party members are posting cut-up party membership cards on social media.

 

[coconut doug]

17 hours ago, JamboX2 said:

 

He's left for more than that. And today's events suggest an albeit far too late in the day switch which wont achieve much.

Boles left because he felt the government were incapable of compromise. He is also reported to have explained that the government whipped strenuously against his amendment because the government felt that having a single market agreement with the EU would be likely to undermine the case for the union in Scotland. Now if there is more to it than that i would be fascinated to know what it is, perhaps you could share it.  

 

What about those folk who march in Scotland with all those flags and banners who call for an end to the Tories and "Red Tories"? Or Sion Nan Gael? The folk who terrorise anti-independence MPs offices? None of them are very open and friendly.

 

Every movement has nutters. Not all Brexiteers are in the EDL. Not everyone who wants independence is like those I've mentioned above.

 

But both are manifestations of nationalism and fronted by nationalists. Your views on what you represent in content may be different but is still putting nation and identity before other concerns.

 

Fundamentally, and we've been here before, I'm yet to be convinced that independence will matter for much (much like Brexit) for social and economic change for Scotland (and the UK). It relocates power at great expense but doesn't change political attitudes or voters concerns and the economic upheaval they cause are counter intuitive to the claimed reasons for them.

Is there something wrong with marching to demand an end to the Tories? I assume they are demanding an end to their policies and not their total annihilation. Similarly the Red Tories. You seem to have an objection to flags too. I'm not sure the saltire has the same connotations as the union flag but we all live in nation states and are entitled to show our support for the state we prefer if we want to.

 How the flags are used can be problematic though. I always think when i see Indy marches that the flag waving is a gesture of solidarity and common purpose built around a desire to form a new country with alternative values and objectives to the one in which we currently reside. I never see or hear of those people behaving in an aggressive or threatening manner its often just an event to show that we still exist and maybe an act of defiance to those who would like to see us destroyed. Whatever else the flag waving is it is not done to demonstrate some kind of ethnic exclusivity. those at the forefront of the Indy movement are at pains to frequently point out our need and desire to bring more people to Scotland.

  The union flag on the other hand i have seen held aloft with Nazi salutes on many occasions and in scotland too. I dont for a moment think that many unionists are fascists but i do think that all the fascists in Scotland are unionists. I think its a good thing to have pride in your country but all too often this morphs into a hatred of those who do not share that national identity. We have done well in Scotland to avoid this hatred on any significant scale.

  What's your problem with Soil nan gael? I pretty much agree with their aims( ijust read them on Wiki as i wasn't aware before) but it seems they do not actually exist, at least not in any meaningful way. I suspect that you remain outraged that one of their members was supposed to have planned an attack on Mrs Thatcher and that others threw a petrol bomb in 1983. On that basis perhaps we can justify anti semitism on the basis the jews were responible for the death of Jesus a few years ago.

  Terrorists in anti - independence MPS offices sounds like a really serious matter though. Cant find any reference to it in the media though, perhaps you could provide a link.

 BTW the support for INDY does not put Nation and identity before other concerns as you repeatedly suggest. Almost all of us who are indy supporters are converts from left leaning parties that have failed to deliver on those other concerns. We now think that our relationships with other countries is about to be seriously damaged because of the aspirations and desires of others . I cant understand why it seems such a problem for you that so many people in Scotland wish to express their solidarity with other nations do so by recognising their own nation and by voting to remain aligned with others who share their internationalism. The waving of Union flags generally does not express that view and if as a result of trying spread our inclusive views a Labour MP has a pro independence sticker placed on his office window that's a price we'll just have to pay.

[coconut doug]

40 minutes ago, Dannie Boy said:

 

To late for the hapless Blackford. No meeting eh!?

Too late for what?               No meeting for whom?

[Don Dan]

Just now, coconut doug said:

Too late for what?               No meeting for whom?

Maybe you need to watch the video or catch up on PMQs for your answer.

[coconut doug]

2 minutes ago, Dannie Boy said:

Maybe you need to watch the video or catch up on PMQs for your answer.

Why don't you have a go at answering it, after all it was you that made the statement in the first place.

[Don Dan]

4 minutes ago, coconut doug said:

Why don't you have a go at answering it, after all it was you that made the statement in the first place.

 

Watch the video the answers clearly there. 

[coconut doug]

1 minute ago, Dannie Boy said:

 

Watch the video the answers clearly there. 

Well why don't you clearly state what you mean on the discussion forum. I have a different interpretation to you as to what happened.

[mutley]

I thought Nicola Sturgeon was meeting the prime minister this afternoon 

[coconut doug]

1 minute ago, mutley said:

I thought Nicola Sturgeon was meeting the prime minister this afternoon 

So did i.

[Cade]

Govt source on challenge of reaching agreement between Theresa May and Jeremy Corbyn on a customs union:

Our (Tory) position is a customs union but we don’t call it a customs union.

Labour’s position is not a customs union but they do call it a customs union.

The challenge is to persuade Jeremy Corbyn to sign up to Theresa May’s non customs union customs union and not call it a customs union.

This would put the UK in a customs union with the EU which would then not be called a customs union.

 

Edited April 3, 2019 by Cade

[Mikey1874]

7 minutes ago, Cade said:

Govt source on challenge of reaching agreement between Theresa May and Jeremy Corbyn on a customs union:

Our (Tory) position is a customs union but we don’t call it a customs union.

Labour’s position is not a customs union but they do call it a customs union.

The challenge is to persuade Jeremy Corbyn to sign up to Theresa May’s non customs union customs union and not call it a customs union.

This would put the UK in a customs union with the EU which would then not be called a customs union.

 

 

Which is the current Deal. 

[Jambo-Jimbo]

36 minutes ago, mutley said:

I thought Nicola Sturgeon was meeting the prime minister this afternoon 

 

Her and the Welsh First Minister are due to meet May after her meeting with Corbyn, so according to Sky & the BBC.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-47792886

 

Edited April 3, 2019 by Jambo-Jimbo

[Cade]

Apparently the back-up plan if Corbyn doesn't fall for the trap is:

To force a Commons decision using Alternative Vote method (preferences) with four options: May deal/Corbyn deal/revoke/no deal.

[Mikey1874]

People proposing Referendum want to stop Brexit and stay in EU. 

 

Not really being very honest. 

[Cade]

6 minutes ago, Mikey1874 said:

People proposing Referendum want to stop Brexit and stay in EU. 

 

Not really being very honest. 

They've all been very open about this from the start

[Cade]

Another minister resigns, this time the guy responsible for no-deal planning

[Mikey1874]

14 minutes ago, Cade said:

They've all been very open about this from the start

 

I've just seen an interview with them. Blackford, Lucas, Umunna etc. 

 

Talked about compromising etc, not stopping Brexit. 

 

Sometimes they are honest. Often it's hidden behind being reasonable. It would help if interviewers challenged them a bit more. 

Edited April 3, 2019 by Mikey1874

[AlphonseCapone]

9 minutes ago, Mikey1874 said:

 

I've just seen an interview with them. Blackford, Lucas, Umunna etc. 

 

Talked about compromising etc, not stopping Brexit. 

 

Sometimes they are honest. Often it's hidden behind being reasonable. It would help if interviewers challenged them a bit more. 

 

Anyone who thinks those three don't want to stop Brexit hasn't been paying attention. They've all been perfectly clear on the matter. 

[Don Dan]

1 hour ago, coconut doug said:

Well why don't you clearly state what you mean on the discussion forum. I have a different interpretation to you as to what happened.

 

Ok Blackford ask why the PM was not meeting the FM for Brexit discussions when everyone except Blackford new there was a meeting arranged for later in the day. 

 

[Cade]

No, Blackford was unhappy that the SNP are being excluded from official Westminster talks and he said he was well aware of Treeza and Nicola having a meeting.

A face to face meeting between two people who don't even sit in the same Parliament is very different from a party being included in vital negotiations of national interest.

[Don Dan]

6 minutes ago, Cade said:

No, Blackford was unhappy that the SNP are being excluded from official Westminster talks and he said he was well aware of Treeza and Nicola having a meeting.

A face to face meeting between two people who don't even sit in the same Parliament is very different from a party being included in vital negotiations of national interest.

 

Begs the question why is Nicola there then and not Blackford. Blackford is supposedly the Westminster leader but is excluded yet again.

[AlphonseCapone]

5 minutes ago, Dannie Boy said:

 

Begs the question why is Nicola there then and not Blackford. Blackford is supposedly the Westminster leader but is excluded yet again.

 

Because it's a national issue not a Westminster one? 

[coconut doug]

5 minutes ago, Dannie Boy said:

 

Begs the question why is Nicola there then and not Blackford. Blackford is supposedly the Westminster leader but is excluded yet again.

It doesn't beg the question at all. May is the leader of her party and is talking to the Leader of another party. May stated in Parliament today that she had had talks with Blackford previously.

 

What has the supposedly hapless Blackford been excluded from "yet again"?

 

May also outlined why the SNP were not included in the formal talks. This is apparently because the SNP are against Brexit and unable to compromise. Another ludicrous assertion by the PM given that the SNP have already voted for a soft Brexit option in the indicative votes. Maybe in your version she has excluded Blackford because he is hapless, a bold charge given the government's handling of Brexit. 

[Don Dan]

9 minutes ago, AlphonseCapone said:

 

Because it's a national issue not a Westminster one? 

 

So every National issue Sturgeon needs to present then. You are either the Leader in Westminster who attends meetings and deals with National issues or just another MP. If it’s a National issue (or national issues) as you suggest then the leader of the SNP needs to be based in Westminster where the Leader can be focused on the tasks. Add into this the SNP leader needs to be across all the issues and be the person that makes any decisions and not some remote Leader who’s main focus should be on Scottish issues here in Scotland. Obviously there needs to be cooperation and communication between them. 

Thats the way it is should be imo. 

[Don Dan]

10 minutes ago, coconut doug said:

It doesn't beg the question at all. May is the leader of her party and is talking to the Leader of another party. May stated in Parliament today that she had had talks with Blackford previously.

 

What has the supposedly hapless Blackford been excluded from "yet again"?

 

May also outlined why the SNP were not included in the formal talks. This is apparently because the SNP are against Brexit and unable to compromise. Another ludicrous assertion by the PM given that the SNP have already voted for a soft Brexit option in the indicative votes. Maybe in your version she has excluded Blackford because he is hapless, a bold charge given the government's handling of Brexit. 

 

Another meeting where the FM flyes down for. Blackford should be there as he is supposedly the SNP leader in Westminster. Sturgeon needs to get on with running Scotland. 

[AlphonseCapone]

4 minutes ago, Dannie Boy said:

 

So every National issue Sturgeon needs to present then. You are either the Leader in Westminster who attends meetings and deals with National issues or just another MP. If it’s a National issue (or national issues) as you suggest then the leader of the SNP needs to be based in Westminster where the Leader can be focused on the tasks. Add into this the SNP leader needs to be across all the issues and be the person that makes any decisions and not some remote Leader who’s main focus should be on Scottish issues here in Scotland. Obviously there needs to be cooperation and communication between them. 

Thats the way it is should be imo. 

 

Tbh, I shouldn't have used the word issues. For general national issues then Blackford can lead. I should have said in this case we are in National Emergency territory and that's why it's important it's the top dog in the room. 

[Mikey1874]

42 minutes ago, Cade said:

No, Blackford was unhappy that the SNP are being excluded from official Westminster talks and he said he was well aware of Treeza and Nicola having a meeting.

A face to face meeting between two people who don't even sit in the same Parliament is very different from a party being included in vital negotiations of national interest.

 

Is he actually unhappy? 

 

Or Is he doing everything to try to stay in EU. He isn't clear on that. He orates brilliantly on keeping Scotland in EU. But then plays the victim or tries to sound like the voice of reason.

 

He does have something to be unhappy about. May and Corbyn are delivering Brexit. 

Edited April 3, 2019 by Mikey1874

[AlphonseCapone]

6 minutes ago, Dannie Boy said:

 

Another meeting where the FM flyes down for. Blackford should be there as he is supposedly the SNP leader in Westminster. Sturgeon needs to get on with running Scotland. 

 

That's a meaningless soundbite mate. She runs the country every single day along with the cabinet, ministers and the civil service. A few trips to London doesn't stop the country running. 

[Don Dan]

1 minute ago, AlphonseCapone said:

 

Tbh, I shouldn't have used the word issues. For general national issues then Blackford can lead. I should have said in this case we are in National Emergency territory and that's why it's important it's the top dog in the room. 

 

For me the Top Leader needs to be in Westminster where they have first hand knowledge of what’s going on. 

I do agree it is a National Emergency.  In saying that the latest ministerial resignation has said his job no longer needed. Make of that what you will. 

[AlphonseCapone]

1 minute ago, Mikey1874 said:

 

Is he actually unhappy? 

 

Or Is he doing everything to try to stay in EU. He isn't clear on that. He orates brilliantly on keeping Scotland in EU. But then plays the victim or tries to sound like the voice of reason.

 

He's just unhappy May and Corbyn are delivering Brexit. 

 

I'll have what you are having please. Delivering Brexit? That's either the most deluded post or most intentional lie on this thread. Honestly, ****ing hell. Belter. 

[Francis Albert]

3 hours ago, Martin_T said:

 

Regardless, this persecution complex you seem to carry about the 'remainer' media, as if there is some sort of under representation of the leave vote, is nonsense.

 

Even the BBC, which is supposed to be balanced, I can't recall the last time that I watched Question Time without the panel and audience being primarily Leave. Indeed they also allowed for the normalization of the extreme views of Farage by allowing him to regularly appear as a guest.

Sorry if I seem to have a persecution complex. I am harder on the Guardian than the Mail or Express because as a Guardian reader of nearly 50 years I expect better. I have no high expectations of the Mail or Express. But I expect the Guardian to respect to some degree the difference between news and opinion. "Opinion is free, facts are sacred" as the slightly nauseating sales blurb says. It is not just the news either. You can read the arts, sports, restaurant and film  reviews etc of the Mail without Brexit intruding much if at all. In everything in the Guardian the word "brexit" tends to pop up, with the word  "disaster" not far away.

Edited April 3, 2019 by Francis Albert