Brexit Deal agreed ( updated )

[Martin_T]

Daily Express: NO DEAL DEAD: Theresa May ON ROPES as rebel Grieve tables SHOCK amendment.
https://www-express-co-uk.cdn.ampproject.org/c/s/www.express.co.uk/news/politics/1054281/brexit-news-no-deal-brexit-vote-dominic-grieve-theresa-may-eu-deal/amp

 

No deal dead according to the above interpretation. I think a second referendum is looking increasingly inevitable.

[Mikey1874]

May on now 

[Mikey1874]

Legal advice to be published. Government have accepted vote. 

 

 

Edited December 4, 2018 by Mikey1874

[Mikey1874]

AND.. 

 

 

[Mikey1874]

May being interrupted continually 

[Mikey1874]

3 minutes ago, Mikey1874 said:

AND.. 

 

 

 

 

[Victorian]

50 minutes ago, Dannie Boy said:

Can of worms just been open and the hinges welded open on Pandoras Box. This now means all legal advise in all governments across the country need to be published in full, past and present when asked and done so in all fairness. 

 

Nope.    Only when parliament has voted for it to be published,   like this case.

 

The 'convention' of a government not publishing remains,  unless voted otherwise.

[Mikey1874]

3 minutes ago, Victorian said:

 

Nope.    Only when parliament has voted for it to be published,   like this case.

 

The 'convention' of a government not publishing remains,  unless voted otherwise.

 

It's clear these are exceptional circumstances 

 

They can still redact (black paint over the words) anything that is genuinely confidential. 

[Victorian]

The government is now a Brexit corpse.    Parliament has taken full control and rightly so.     

 

Making an utter ***** of everything and excluding all other views at every juncture has come back to bite it's arse.

 

We're almost certainly having Brexit ref2.

[Francis Albert]

19 minutes ago, Mikey1874 said:

AND.. 

 

 

Certainly simplifies things. MPs can set the terms of Brexit? I thought the EU had some say in that.

[The Mighty Thor]

3 minutes ago, Victorian said:

The government is now a Brexit corpse.    Parliament has taken full control and rightly so.     

 

Making an utter ***** of everything and excluding all other views at every juncture has come back to bite it's arse.

 

We're almost certainly having Brexit ref2.

Dominic Grieve has taken her legs completely. 

Marvellous.

 

[Mikey1874]

9 minutes ago, Francis Albert said:

Certainly simplifies things. MPs can set the terms of Brexit? I thought the EU had some say in that.

 

I think those looking at a different deal are willing to accept the Deal May made with EU as long as there is a better commitment to what the final deal looks like. Most concerns are about the final deal. EU is willing to have further talks on that. 

 

 

Edited December 4, 2018 by Mikey1874

[Victorian]

Just now, The Mighty Thor said:

Dominic Grieve has taken her legs completely. 

Marvellous.

 

 

A very intelligent chap and would normally be the government's no-brainer Attorney General.    Only not there due to being too pro-remain.     What a shame for the government that it is too backwards and twisted to be able to accomodate the best people.

 

 

[Cade]

[Victorian]

So it moves on to the 5 day debate and vote.     A monumental waste of parliament's time and resources.    If anything,    this is the real contempt of parliament from this government.

 

Seeing this debate and vote drag out is clearly part of the government's wider strategy.     But it is a pre-determined conclusion.      Parliament isn't there to be manipulated in such a grossly wasteful way.     40 hours of parliament's time on an unwinnable vote.      Absolutely unprecedented.

[Mikey1874]

4 minutes ago, Victorian said:

So it moves on to the 5 day debate and vote.     A monumental waste of parliament's time and resources.    If anything,    this is the real contempt of parliament from this government.

 

Seeing this debate and vote drag out is clearly part of the government's wider strategy.     But it is a pre-determined conclusion.      Parliament isn't there to be manipulated in such a grossly wasteful way.     40 hours of parliament's time on an unwinnable vote.      Absolutely unprecedented.

 

Why it's good there can be amendments.

 

It is a very slow process now 30 months since the vote. This is just part of the silly indecisive process based on a Tory Government untterly divided. 

 

It will now be done by consensus probably what they should have done at the start. 

[Francis Albert]

33 minutes ago, Mikey1874 said:

 

I think those looking at a different deal are willing to accept the Deal May made with EU as long as there is a better commitment to what the final deal looks like. Most concerns are about the final deal. EU is willing to have further talks on that. 

 

 

Of course the EU is "willing to have further talks". In fact it is committed to doing so. So far there is just a non-binding commitment to have talks about the UK/EU relationship after the transition period, which is all the May deal covers. How can there be a "better commitment to what the final deal looks like" before talks have even started?

In the Westminster bubble people seem to be acting as if the outcome is a decision for Westminster. It isn't.

[Victorian]

1 minute ago, Mikey1874 said:

 

Why it's good there can be amendments.

 

It is a very slow process now 30 months since the vote. This is just part of the silly indecisive process based on a Tory Government untterly divided. 

 

It will now be done by consensus probably what they should have done at the start. 

 

Now is the point for them to know to stop and rethink.    Ultimately a consensus based,  cross party driven process will take over.     The government's strategy is a busted flush... but it ploughs on regardless and wastes another week.

[Mikey1874]

3 minutes ago, Francis Albert said:

Of course the EU is "willing to have further talks". In fact it is committed to doing so. So far there is just a non-binding commitment to have talks about the UK/EU relationship after the transition period, which is all the May deal covers. How can there be a "better commitment to what the final deal looks like" before talks have even started?

In the Westminster bubble people seem to be acting as if the outcome is a decision for Westminster. It isn't.

 

I think part of the difficulty is that point. Including all the talk of a second vote.

 

People haven't understood the status of this Deal. Just an interim deal on leaving.

 

In my view we should leave with the full deal in place. Then it's all clear. Or at least a lot clearer. 

Edited December 4, 2018 by Mikey1874

[Don Dan]

1 hour ago, Victorian said:

 

Nope.    Only when parliament has voted for it to be published,   like this case.

 

The 'convention' of a government not publishing remains,  unless voted otherwise.

 

Not according to the debate today. It was one of the points raised and Scotland was used as an example Alex Salmond and the SNP refused to reveal the legal advise given to them. 

Keir Stamner (sp) was also warned that if he was ever in the position of Attorney General he too now have to divulge any legal advice given to government. 

That convention is now gone forever.   

Edited December 4, 2018 by Dannie Boy

[Victorian]

2 minutes ago, Dannie Boy said:

 

Not according to the debate today. It was one of the points raised and Scotland was used as an example Alex Salmond and the SNP refused to reveal the legal advise given to them. 

Keir Stamner (sp) was also warned that if he was ever in the position of Attorney General he too now have to divulge any legal advice given to government. 

That convention is now gone forever.   

 

Nope.  This instance arrived via a parliamentary motion to publish.     The next instance may not face a vote and the government could resume the convention.

[Francis Albert]

3 minutes ago, Mikey1874 said:

 

I think part of the difficulty is that point. Including all the talk of a second vote.

 

People haven't understood the status of this Deal. Just an interim deal on leaving.

 

In my view we should leave with the full deal in place. Then it's all clear. 

Agreed but it is not in Westminster's gift to deliver that. The EU would need to agree to suspend Article 50 while negotiation of the final deal is concluded. It would have to accept that after another two years or so of negotiation UK may still choose to leave. The EU will then have to negotiate an agreement to make a transition to avoid the cliff edge and chaos.

I think that's asking a lot of the EU, which seems to be pleased with what it currently has.

But let the Westminster circus continue regardless.

[Don Dan]

7 minutes ago, Victorian said:

 

Nope.  This instance arrived via a parliamentary motion to publish.     The next instance may not face a vote and the government could resume the convention.

 

Well that’s not what was said today. Time will tell. As I said the convention will now be challenged and today’s win will be used to great effect.

[Victorian]

Just now, Dannie Boy said:

 

Well that’s not what was said today. Time will tell. As I said the convention will now be challenged and today’s win will be used to great effect.

 

Well sorry but it's wrong.    Today's vote was to determine if the government was in contempt by failing to comply with the previous vote on whether the full advice should be published.    Today's vote (and the previous one) was not to determine whether all legal advice should be published.

 

Most times a government would not even lose such a motion.    This government laughably didn't even contest the previous motion.

 

Only if a similar motion is moved and won will a government be obliged to publish full legal advice.    

[Don Dan]

Just now, Victorian said:

 

Well sorry but it's wrong.    Today's vote was to determine if the government was in contempt by failing to comply with the previous vote on whether the full advice should be published.    Today's vote (and the previous one) was not to determine whether all legal advice should be published.

 

Most times a government would not even lose such a motion.    This government laughably didn't even contest the previous motion.

 

Only if a similar motion is moved and won will a government be obliged to publish full legal advice.    

 

I’m  only conveying what was said by people who are in Parliament and who would know what’s what. One being a previous Attorney General. 

[Francis Albert]

9 minutes ago, Dannie Boy said:

 

I’m  only conveying what was said by people who are in Parliament and who would know what’s what. One being a previous Attorney General. 

 

Now that that cat is out the bag Parliament would surely be remiss in not seeking full disclosure in future. Why would it choose not to be fully informed?

[Victorian]

In most times when a government has a majority,   it wont face losing such a motion,   therefore a motion probably wouldn't even be moved.     Parliament can only force full disclosure when it can win a motion to oblige a government.

 

This does not mean every instance of legal advice is published.    The end.

[LeftBack]

Does anyone have any admiration for Boris Johnson? I'll nail my colours firmly to the mask and say categorically he is a buffoon, a racist, an elitist and a buffoon. I realise I said buffoon twice but I felt it important to reiterate.

I've decided I have upmost admiration for the fact he manages to get his trousers on most days.

Edited December 4, 2018 by LeftBack

[Francis Albert]

7 minutes ago, Victorian said:

In most times when a government has a majority,   it wont face losing such a motion,   therefore a motion probably wouldn't even be moved.     Parliament can only force full disclosure when it can win a motion to oblige a government.

 

This does not mean every instance of legal advice is published.    The end.

Because parties can always rely on loyalty from their backbenchers?

Maybe more so in the past but certainly not so in the age of Boris and Mogg and even in the past in the case of for example the current leader of the  opposition.

[AlimOzturk]

1 minute ago, LeftBack said:

Does anyone have any admiration for Boris Johnson? I'll nail my colours firmly to the mask and say categorically he is a buffoon, a racist, an elitist and a buffoon. I realise I said buffoon twice but I felt it important to reiterate.

 

He is talking utter nonesense. Think Brussels will fold to our will 

 

[Victorian]

1 minute ago, LeftBack said:

Does anyone have any admiration for Boris Johnson? I'll nail my colours firmly to the mask and say categorically he is a buffoon, a racist, an elitist and a buffoon. I realise I said buffoon twice but I felt it important to reiterate.

 

A very wealthy populist maniac who will have no further platform once Brexit is settled either way.     He'll go on to tslk utter shite in some other context.

[Victorian]

1 minute ago, Francis Albert said:

Because parties can always rely on loyalty from their backbenchers?

Maybe more so in the past but certainly not so in the age of Boris and Mogg and even in the past in the case of for example the current leader of the  opposition.

 

Now we're getting near reality.   It will depend on the circumstances of any given government,  issue,  time,  etc.

 

Again... this does not set any cast in stone precedent.

[LeftBack]

2 minutes ago, AlimOzturk said:

 

He is talking utter nonesense. Think Brussels will fold to our will 

 

He still thinks the sun doesn't set on the British empire

[Unknown user]

4 minutes ago, LeftBack said:

Does anyone have any admiration for Boris Johnson? I'll nail my colours firmly to the mask and say categorically he is a buffoon, a racist, an elitist and a buffoon. I realise I said buffoon twice but I felt it important to reiterate.

I've decided I have upmost admiration for the fact he manages to get his trousers on most days.

 

He's pretty good at rugby. Against Asian bairns. 

 

 

Also, master of the flying headbutt tackle

 

 

Not buffoony at all, nope

[Mikey1874]

32 minutes ago, Dannie Boy said:

 

I’m  only conveying what was said by people who are in Parliament and who would know what’s what. One being a previous Attorney General. 

 

They were arguing points to try to win.

 

That's different to what will happen. 

[shaun.lawson]

11 hours ago, doctor jambo said:

Balls .

most pharma is produced either in the UK, the US, or India.

The generics come from all over.

Pharmacies routinely run out of some stuff. there are also routinely manufacturing issues with some meds.

Brexit hasn't happened yet, so you cannot blame it

 

Surely this isn't the generally Tory-voting doctor jambo displaying that he too has no idea whatsoever about the impact of this unprecedented level of uncertainty, is it? I do believe it is. 

 

This isn't pharmacies 'routinely running out of stuff'. It's mass stockpiling of medicines because of the danger of no deal. Which jake - you really couldn't make this up - has actually called for! 

[shaun.lawson]

22 hours ago, jake said:

No deal.

How anyone can contemplate not getting out now before the meltdown of the EU is staggering.

 

12 hours ago, alfajambo said:

We are where we are Jake. This down to the acceptance of lies, deception and propaganda distilled down over the years. The EU cabal has been implemented steadily and stealthily over several decades. Irrespective of the will of the people.

 

The United States of Europe looms. A centralised Government with, monetary, fiscal, foreign, regulation and military policy all dictated.

 

 

 

 

Remember how Britain leaving was supposed to create this cascade, this domino effect, of country after country lining up to follow us out? Well, would you just look at that: every single member state is now more supportive of the EU than it was before Brexit. This 'meltdown of the EU' exists only in Jake's always frenzied imagination. The UK political system is awfully close to melting down, mind - but what's that got to do with anything, huh?

 

And as for alfajambo, the man who thinks the Mueller investigation into Russian interference and Donald Trump's criminal affairs is a 'sham'... you really don't do facts or evidence, do you? A United States of Europe does not loom. Not now, not in the future, not ever. Next you'll be telling me you believed that pish about Turkey joining. 

[doctor jambo]

15 minutes ago, shaun.lawson said:

 

Surely this isn't the generally Tory-voting doctor jambo displaying that he too has no idea whatsoever about the impact of this unprecedented level of uncertainty, is it? I do believe it is. 

 

This isn't pharmacies 'routinely running out of stuff'. It's mass stockpiling of medicines because of the danger of no deal. Which jake - you really couldn't make this up - has actually called for! 

Surely you are either stockpiling , or running out?

the two are diametrically opposed.

 

[shaun.lawson]

1 minute ago, doctor jambo said:

Surely you are either stockpiling , or running out?

the two are diametrically opposed.

 

 

It's not the pharmacies who are stockpiling. It's the suppliers. For perfectly understandable reasons - albeit today's events, mercifully, appear to have reduced the chances of no deal to practically none. 

 

Post-war, these are unprecedented times. Businesses do not know what's going to happen. Suppliers do not know what's going to happen. The public does not know what's going to happen (and much of it is so thick that 42% of it believes 'no deal' means we stay in the EU!). And the government created all of this by setting the clock ticking before we had any idea what we wanted, or what was possible. Cliff edge, dead ahead.

 

Utter lunacy - for which private prosecutions should be brought for malfeasance in public office.

[doctor jambo]

10 minutes ago, shaun.lawson said:

 

It's not the pharmacies who are stockpiling. It's the suppliers. For perfectly understandable reasons - albeit today's events, mercifully, appear to have reduced the chances of no deal to practically none. 

 

Post-war, these are unprecedented times. Businesses do not know what's going to happen. Suppliers do not know what's going to happen. The public does not know what's going to happen (and much of it is so thick that 42% of it believes 'no deal' means we stay in the EU!). And the government created all of this by setting the clock ticking before we had any idea what we wanted, or what was possible. Cliff edge, dead ahead.

 

Utter lunacy - for which private prosecutions should be brought for malfeasance in public office.

Or, if the media did not keep mentioning it the public would have noticed nothing at all. No price hikes, no property crash, no shortages , no anything. 

Despite everything since the vote nothing has happened. 

Our economy has grown . Life continues.   "Since the war" wtaf. Not a single life has been lost. City of London made record profits despite them all leaving for Frankfurt and Paris . U.K. Has seen record tax intake post vote and falling unemployment . I am a strong remainer, but this is utter hysterical nonsense 

[doctor jambo]

And for comparison , care to suggest what damage to the economy of a hard brexit would have

 

vs the damage to the economy a Corbyn government would have?

 

i suspect one would cause a recession, a flight of capital , fall in currency value and rising national debt and loss of big companies.

 

 

and the other is brexit

[JyTees]

2 hours ago, LeftBack said:

Does anyone have any admiration for Boris Johnson? I'll nail my colours firmly to the mask and say categorically he is a buffoon, a racist, an elitist and a buffoon. I realise I said buffoon twice but I felt it important to reiterate.

I've decided I have upmost admiration for the fact he manages to get his trousers on most days.

 

Racist?

[jake]

1 hour ago, shaun.lawson said:

 

 

 

Remember how Britain leaving was supposed to create this cascade, this domino effect, of country after country lining up to follow us out? Well, would you just look at that: every single member state is now more supportive of the EU than it was before Brexit. This 'meltdown of the EU' exists only in Jake's always frenzied imagination. The UK political system is awfully close to melting down, mind - but what's that got to do with anything, huh?

 

And as for alfajambo, the man who thinks the Mueller investigation into Russian interference and Donald Trump's criminal affairs is a 'sham'... you really don't do facts or evidence, do you? A United States of Europe does not loom. Not now, not in the future, not ever. Next you'll be telling me you believed that pish about Turkey joining. 

I can't actually be bothered to reply to that hysterical nonsense.

Have a wee reality check will you now.

?

[shaun.lawson]

1 hour ago, doctor jambo said:

Or, if the media did not keep mentioning it the public would have noticed nothing at all. No price hikes, no property crash, no shortages , no anything. 

Despite everything since the vote nothing has happened. 

Our economy has grown . Life continues.   "Since the war" wtaf. Not a single life has been lost. City of London made record profits despite them all leaving for Frankfurt and Paris . U.K. Has seen record tax intake post vote and falling unemployment . I am a strong remainer, but this is utter hysterical nonsense 

 

Bwahaha - so you want the media not to mention it and pretend everything is fine? Was that your stance when the economy crashed in 2008? Thought not. Oh, and plenty of lives have been lost, due to austerity. 

 

56 minutes ago, doctor jambo said:

And for comparison , care to suggest what damage to the economy of a hard brexit would have

 

vs the damage to the economy a Corbyn government would have?

 

i suspect one would cause a recession, a flight of capital , fall in currency value and rising national debt and loss of big companies.

 

 

and the other is brexit

 

Damage of hard/no deal Brexit: catastrophic and generational.

 

Corbyn government: four-decades-long overdue rebalancing of economy, partial definancialisation, investment in our public services and infrastructure, proper remuneration for public servants. 

 

'Rising national debt'? Tory governments have increased the debt massively more than Labour governments. 'Fall in currency value'? The currency depreciated hugely as a result of, oh yes, Brexit. Brexiteers then claimed en masse that this was a good thing.

 

Do you seriously never look at the last 40 years, then look at Germany and think "we should've been them"? Does it never occur to you to question what exactly an economy based on ridiculous property prices and credit is built on? The answer is: sand, liable to give way at any moment. Portugal has a socialist government and it's doing great. Funny, that. 

[LeftBack]

4 minutes ago, JyTees said:

 

Racist?

I accept that was lazy and although in my opinion he probably does feel his race is superior to that of others, I will retract that and apologies for any offence caused. I think he is an xenophobic buffoon. 

[shaun.lawson]

3 minutes ago, jake said:

I can't actually be bothered to reply to that hysterical nonsense.

Have a wee reality check will you now.

?

 

The only hysterical nonsense is coming from you. The man who thinks problems in Italy mean the entire EU will collapse at any moment.

 

The same EU which, in your parallel universe, is facing 'meltdown' just did an enormous trade deal with Japan. So now Jake off the internet knows more about economics, trade and geopolitics than Japan's leaders? The latter, incidentally, are furious about Brexit. The reason for this is that they have a clue. Unlike some people I could mention.

[Ulysses]

The Irish Border publishes its legal advice on the Withdrawal Agreement.

 

https://twitter.com/BorderIrish/status/1069588671475654661

 

 

 

 

 

[jake]

1 hour ago, shaun.lawson said:

 

Surely this isn't the generally Tory-voting doctor jambo displaying that he too has no idea whatsoever about the impact of this unprecedented level of uncertainty, is it? I do believe it is. 

 

This isn't pharmacies 'routinely running out of stuff'. It's mass stockpiling of medicines because of the danger of no deal. Which jake - you really couldn't make this up - has actually called for! 

Too right I am.

I am in principle opposed to the EU and all it's stands for.

And if Mays deal is rightly rejected then as the old saying goes no deal is better than a bad deal.

And the EU project is also a bad deal.

For reasons far more important than supposed economic growth.

 

 

 

[shaun.lawson]

Just now, jake said:

Too right I am.

I am in principle opposed to the EU and all it's stands for.

And if Mays deal is rightly rejected then as the old saying goes no deal is better than a bad deal.

And the EU project is also a bad deal.

For reasons far more important than supposed economic growth.

 

 

 

 

1. The EU is, by and large, a good thing - but it needs urgent reform.

 

2. A bad deal is a bad deal. No deal is a catastrophe. It looks increasingly as though neither will be the outcome though. 

 

3. There is no freedom without economic surplus.

[jake]

1 minute ago, shaun.lawson said:

 

The only hysterical nonsense is coming from you. The man who thinks problems in Italy mean the entire EU will collapse at any moment.

 

The same EU which, in your parallel universe, is facing 'meltdown' just did an enormous trade deal with Japan. So now Jake off the internet knows more about economics, trade and geopolitics than Japan's leaders? The latter, incidentally, are furious about Brexit. The reason for this is that they have a clue. Unlike some people I could mention.

It's currently more concerning for the EU than brexit .

You talk about having a clue yet have no concept of reality.

Can almost hear you shrieking like some mad lesbian .