Brexit Deal agreed ( updated )

[Ulysses]

17 minutes ago, Dannie Boy said:

the Back Stop is the main problem and needs to go or at least have an end date or exit clause.

 

 

Why?  Most people who think the backstop is a bad idea can't tell you what it is, what it does, or when and why it would operate.  The only alternatives the British government have offered to a legal backstop are vague notions of technological border solutions that never translate into concrete ideas, or else downright lies.

 

The best way for the UK to avoid a backstop solution to the border conundrum is to stop cat-farting about and reach a sensible long-term trade agreement with the EU 27.  That way, the backstop won't be needed.

 

[gashauskis9]

General election it is then.  I expected her to win by a more comfortable margin, but now there’s no way in hell she’ll get the deal through Parliament.

 

 

[Don Dan]

There is a way out of the Back Stop which as you say most people dont get. They are either wilfully ignoring it or don’t understand it. As I say it’s the main stumbling block at the moment and I suspect it will be altered or ditched.

Edited December 12, 2018 by Dannie Boy

[Ulysses]

1 minute ago, Dannie Boy said:

I suspect it will be altered or ditched.

 

Why?

[Ulysses]

2 minutes ago, Gashauskis9 said:

General election it is then.  I expected her to win by a more comfortable margin, but now there’s no way in hell she’ll get the deal through Parliament.

 

 

 

Rees-Mogg is right - she failed to win a majority of backbenchers.

 

She should either quit or else put the deal to a vote on the basis that if it is voted down she'll go to the country.

[Unknown user]

11 minutes ago, Lord BJ said:

 

I don’t think so. Highly unlikely a no deal will be allowed by parliament. MP’s who support a no deal are a fairly small bunch, albeit vocal.

 

More likely a extension or revoking of article 50 to give more time to figure this mess out imo. Though it’s hard to predict.

This is what I've been thinking, I can't see any other way out of this in time

[pablo]

8 minutes ago, Lord BJ said:

 

I don’t think so. Highly unlikely a no deal will be allowed by parliament. MP’s who support a no deal are a fairly small bunch, albeit vocal.

 

More likely a extension or revoking of article 50 to give more time to figure this mess out imo. Though it’s hard to predict.

 

We need more time above all else. Forget about the arguments of Remain and Leave, we must be well in to the territory of having to do what is best in terms of protecting national interest?

[Don Dan]

9 minutes ago, Ulysses said:

 

Why?

 

Why because the deal would more than likely win the backing of Parliament. That way the rest if the deal can pass allowing us and the EU  to continue with the final trading deal. 

[Victorian]

A postponement of article 50 requires consent from all 27 EU members.    Tricky.

 

A revocation can be done unilaterally by the UK parliament.    The government will not move this so it will depend on if others in parliament can work together to do so.   

[Mikey1874]

25 minutes ago, pablo said:

 

Possible. These are remarkable times. Then what though? We're leaving the EU on the 29th of March. There would need to a Tory leadership contest, a general election and a revoke of article 50 in 3 months?

 

We need to calm the markets, this is turning into utter chaos. 

 

There are different options. 

 

One would be a new government without the need for an election.

 

More likely an election. 

[Mikey1874]

Jacob Rees-Mogg said something on TV about the Lisbon treaty I think being a limitation on what can happen.

 

But I didn't grasp what that meant. 

[Cruyff Turn]

Pointless calling a No Confidence Party Vote but it looks like only 200 back her which isn’t great when more than a third of her own party don’t support her. It probably also means those who voted against her will vote against her Brexit deal. 

 

I wonder if that number would stay the same if Labour or SNP tabled a motion for a vote of no confidence in the Government. If it did, she’s a gone’r. 

 

She’s got some brass neck on her, i’ll give her that much. She’s not acting with much dignity however, she should really go now.

[Dawnrazor]

2 minutes ago, Mikey1874 said:

 

 

But I didn't grasp what that meant. 

Does anyone ever?! 

[Mikey1874]

27 minutes ago, Lord BJ said:

 

I don’t think so. Highly unlikely a no deal will be allowed by parliament. MP’s who support a no deal are a fairly small bunch, albeit vocal.

 

More likely a extension or revoking of article 50 to give more time to figure this mess out imo. Though it’s hard to predict.

 

We could get a 'No Deal' but with EU and UK agreeing certain arrangements so it is as smooth as possible.

 

Even along the lines of the Deal. 

[Ulysses]

11 minutes ago, Dannie Boy said:

 

Why because the deal would more than likely win the backing of Parliament. That way the rest if the deal can pass allowing us and the EU  to continue with the final trading deal. 

 

But how would that help if it wouldn't win the backing of the EU 27?

[Dawnrazor]

I don't think there will ever be a "no deal" or a "clean break" there will have to be some agreements on some things, the question is what and how many. 

[Dawnrazor]

4 minutes ago, Mikey1874 said:

 

We could get a 'No Deal' but with EU and UK agreeing certain arrangements so it is as smooth as possible.

 

Even along the lines of the Deal. 

Yep, I think this is the likeliest outcome. 

[Unknown user]

9 minutes ago, Victorian said:

A postponement of article 50 requires consent from all 27 EU members.    Tricky.

 

A revocation can be done unilaterally by the UK parliament.    The government will not move this so it will depend on if others in parliament can work together to do so.   

I don't think it would be that tricky, in the cold light of day a no deal brexit isn't good for anyone. Everyone would rather arrangements were in place than not.

[Victorian]

Just now, Smithee said:

I don't think it would be that tricky, in the cold light of day a no deal brexit isn't good for anyone. Everyone would rather arrangements were in place than not.

 

Well tricky or at least time consuming.    One thing is for sure,    the government wont move it.     It will only come about after the government is brought down or if people work across the benches and can move it extra-governmental.

[Cade]

Why are people still saying "We'll leave with no deal but then do a deal"?

 

That's unicorns and rainbows stuff.

No deal means WTO rules (even then China and Russia have said no to us doing that).

 

No deal does not mean "another new deal"!

 

[Cruyff Turn]

For the U.K. to get a super deal in Brexiteers eyes, imo they have to leave the EU with no deal, then go back and negotiate once all ties are severed. 

 

That also means taking on the chin the potential break up of the U.K. 

 

It may be a case if you’re a Brexiteer that it’s better to cross each bridge when it comes to it rather than cross all bridges at the same time, which is what Mays been trying to do. 

[Victorian]

No deal is not the most damaging thing.   No deal = no transition.    No transition will be extremely troublesome.

[Unknown user]

2 minutes ago, Victorian said:

No deal is not the most damaging thing.   No deal = no transition.    No transition will be extremely troublesome.

Yeah that would be very scary

 

[Don Dan]

9 minutes ago, Ulysses said:

 

But how would that help if it wouldn't win the backing of the EU 27?

 

Thats why May is talking again with the EU leaders. I believe she’ll be in your neck of the woods tomorrow. Let’s see how she gets on. 

[Mikey1874]

5 minutes ago, Cade said:

Why are people still saying "We'll leave with no deal but then do a deal"?

 

That's unicorns and rainbows stuff.

No deal means WTO rules (even then China and Russia have said no to us doing that).

 

No deal does not mean "another new deal"!

 

 

Because the EU especially is used to do doing back door deals.  

 

And it eases the way to a full Deal..

[Victorian]

Just now, Smithee said:

Yeah that would be very scary

 

 

I think so.     Empty reassurances and theoretical scenarios to the contrary are not enough to have any faith that there will be no practical trauma.     There could be trauma we haven't even thought of yet.

[pablo]

3 minutes ago, Victorian said:

No deal is not the most damaging thing.   No deal = no transition.    No transition will be extremely troublesome.

 

If there's no transition period, the ports are going to collapse post 29/03. For how long and what the consequences are, I'm not sure. But our import and export trade is going to cease to exist as we know it.

[Ulysses]

3 minutes ago, Dannie Boy said:

 

Thats why May is talking again with the EU leaders. I believe she’ll be in your neck of the woods tomorrow. Let’s see how she gets on. 

 

Yes.  But how would it help if the EU 27 says no?

[Mikey1874]

1 minute ago, pablo said:

 

If there's no transition period, the ports are going to collapse post 29/03. For how long and what the consequences are, I'm not sure. But our import and export trade is going to cease to exist as we know it.

 

Someone said the World Trade Organisation (WTO) (No Deal) involves a transition period 

[Unknown user]

2 minutes ago, pablo said:

 

If there's no transition period, the ports are going to collapse post 29/03. For how long and what the consequences are, I'm not sure. But our import and export trade is going to cease to exist as we know it.

I can't even start to imagine the potential consequences

[Don Dan]

3 minutes ago, Ulysses said:

 

Yes.  But how would it help if the EU 27 says no?

 

Will they or won’t they, let’s wait and see. 

[pablo]

2 minutes ago, Mikey1874 said:

 

Someone said the World Trade Organisation (WTO) (No Deal) involves a transition period 

 

My understanding is that if we crash out with no deal, the UK becomes a "third country" and all goods leaving or entering will require declaration, customs and/or excise.

1 minute ago, Smithee said:

I can't even start to imagine the potential consequences

 

Nope me neither. The government will have prioritise certain goods and sectors for a period of time. 

[coconut doug]

3 hours ago, JyTees said:

 

Don't need stats to see what a rip roaring kent the Nats have made of the Scottish education system. But that's for another thread.

 

1 hour ago, JyTees said:

 

I think it's pretty much a unilateral consensus amongst everyone unfortunate enough to be directly or indirectly affected by the state of Scotland's education system, unless you're part of the mad cult and can't see the nose in front of your face.

Clearly this is not the thread which makes me wonder why the OP decided to gratuitously rubbish education in Scotland to illustrate his support for the P.M. The information he offered is not relevant to changing standards. It is not clear whether he knows this and is merely trying to belittle Scotland and those involved in education or whether he is incapable or unwilling to understand the latest education statistics. It could be all three.

It is clear with you however as you don’t value the evidence used to show the recent improvements I quoted. You seem to attach no significance to the performance indicators that the government use or value assessments and analysis that create them. In future I suppose if we want to know how any aspect of government is performing we should just ask a Tory.

If this information is at the end of your nose perhaps you could provide a little detail pertaining to the shortcomings in Scottish education.

 

On another thread if you like but a short response would suffice. i would like to know how everybody in this unilateral consensus has arrived at the same opinion if they don't value the performance indicators. It couldn't be that they are the victims of misinformation in the press, and that they are the ones who are victims of a "mad cult"could it?

[Ulysses]

3 minutes ago, Dannie Boy said:

 

Will they or won’t they, let’s wait and see. 

 

You didn't say you'd wait and see.  You said it has to go.  What if the EU 27 says no?  They've already said, while the result of the vote was being awaited, that the withdrawal agreement is a "balanced compromise" and the "best outcome available".  The EU 27 have agreed to provide reassurance to the UK, but not to re-open or contradict the agreement.

 

So, what if the EU 27 won't change the agreement?

 

[Cade]

The only deal being made today was the free trade deal between Japan and the EU, forming a free trading block of 635million people and 1/3 of global GDP.

 

 

Edited December 12, 2018 by Cade

[Mikey1874]

3 minutes ago, Cade said:

The only deal being made today was the free trade deal between Japan and the EU, forming a free trading block of 635million people and 1/3 of global GDP.

 

Another one UK loses. Singapore is another one coming. 

[jake]

3 minutes ago, Cade said:

The only deal being made today was the free trade deal between Japan and the EU, forming a free trading block of 635million people and 1/3 of global GDP.

 

 

Yay global capitalism .

Proud of your conversion Cade.

I remember when you were a socialist.

???

[pablo]

 

One of the (many) things I've struggled to understand throughout this debacle, is the Irish Border issue. The UK and Ireland have both said that they will not be putting up a hard border between NI and the Republic, even if there is a No Deal Brexit? 

 

So who actually is it that's going to turn up on the island and start inspecting goods and the movement of people? Bulgarians, Croats?

 

 

[Don Dan]

13 minutes ago, Ulysses said:

 

You didn't say you'd wait and see.  You said it has to go.  What if the EU 27 says no?  They've already said, while the result of the vote was being awaited, that the withdrawal agreement is a "balanced compromise" and the "best outcome available".  The EU 27 have agreed to provide reassurance to the UK, but not to re-open or contradict the agreement.

 

So, what if the EU 27 won't change the agreement?

 

 

“the Back Stop is the main problem and needs to go or at least have an end date or exit clause.”  

Nothing is impossible and the EU are happy and often do take things through to the last minute. They may or may not alter the deal and or give a better assurance that means the backstop is more palatable to the objectors of it here in the UK parliament. If They do  then the transition deal can be ratified and we can continue with the final deal in good time. 

Edited December 12, 2018 by Dannie Boy

[JamboX2]

1 hour ago, Mikey1874 said:

 

Sorry

 

I mean a vote of no confidence in Parliament called by The Opposition (Labour)

 

Any party can call it. It was an SNP motion backed by the Tories and Liberals which brought about the end of the Callaghan government. 

 

This idea only Labour can is wrong.

 

If others called it Labour would be bounced into it.

[jake]

Honestly it's like repetition on a revote.

 

Brought to you by newsnight

[Ulysses]

30 minutes ago, Dannie Boy said:

 

“the Back Stop is the main problem and needs to go or at least have an end date or exit clause.”  

Nothing is impossible and the EU are happy and often do take things through to the last minute. They may or may not alter the deal and or give a better assurance that means the backstop is more palatable to the objectors of it here in the UK parliament. If They do  then the transition deal can be ratified and we can continue with the final deal in good time. 

 

 

Ah.  That means it doesn't need to go and doesn't need and end date or exit clause.  A better assurance is just a better assurance.  Unless the EU 27 is willing to alter the agreement, the legal terms of the backstop will stay as they are written at present.

 

Here's a piece setting out why the EU doesn't want the UK to remain in the backstop.  Given that the EU is clear the UK shouldn't remain in the backstop, that both sides are clear that they don't want the UK to enter the backstop in the first place, and given the continued assurances of the British government that they have a raft of ideas for how to avoid a hard border, it's hard to see where the problem is coming from.

 

https://theconversation.com/brexit-why-the-eu-doesnt-want-the-uk-to-remain-in-the-backstop-indefinitely-108451

[Ulysses]

42 minutes ago, pablo said:

 

One of the (many) things I've struggled to understand throughout this debacle, is the Irish Border issue. The UK and Ireland have both said that they will not be putting up a hard border between NI and the Republic, even if there is a No Deal Brexit? 

 

So who actually is it that's going to turn up on the island and start inspecting goods and the movement of people? Bulgarians, Croats?

 

 

 

The British, and the Irish, by the look of things.  The UK has repeatedly said it has ideas to avoid a hard border, but when asked by the EU 27 to elaborate on them it hasn't done so.

 

The real issue that seems to have arisen now is that in order to avoid treating NI differently to GB, the backstop doesn't just apply to NI.  It applies to the whole of the UK, and requires the UK to remain in a customs union and to follow its rules.  But the EU 27 didn't insist on that - the UK did.

 

The solution to this is for the UK to present workable ideas for avoiding a hard border, or better still for the two sides to sort out their long-term arrangements.  The backstop is only called for if neither of those things succeed.  The backstop does not apply during the period of the Withdrawal Agreement.  It only applies if the UK "crashes out" without a long-term deal on 31 December 2020.

[JyTees]

1 hour ago, coconut doug said:

 

Clearly this is not the thread which makes me wonder why the OP decided to gratuitously rubbish education in Scotland to illustrate his support for the P.M. The information he offered is not relevant to changing standards. It is not clear whether he knows this and is merely trying to belittle Scotland and those involved in education or whether he is incapable or unwilling to understand the latest education statistics. It could be all three.

It is clear with you however as you don’t value the evidence used to show the recent improvements I quoted. You seem to attach no significance to the performance indicators that the government use or value assessments and analysis that create them. In future I suppose if we want to know how any aspect of government is performing we should just ask a Tory.

If this information is at the end of your nose perhaps you could provide a little detail pertaining to the shortcomings in Scottish education.

 

On another thread if you like but a short response would suffice. i would like to know how everybody in this unilateral consensus has arrived at the same opinion if they don't value the performance indicators. It couldn't be that they are the victims of misinformation in the press, and that they are the ones who are victims of a "mad cult"could it?

 

I witness it with my own eyes on a daily basis. First hand. I don't need doctored stats and targets to tell me everything in the garden is rosey. It's far from it.

 

Like I said before, not the thread for this but no amount of statistical analysis or figures being bent to suit a political agenda will alter my opinion on the matter. I'll trust my own real life observations thanks.

 

[ri Alban]

4 hours ago, Lord BJ said:

Irrespective of how she’s handled things. That’s a ***** of a day she faced. She not a easy hand to play as prime minister.

 

i thought she looked a bit emotional at Downing Street.

 

i find it hard not to have a bit of sympathy for her. 

 

JRM is a ****ing *****!!! (Just appeared on my tv)

Aw, must be really hard for her, while those at the end of her policies losing their benefits and homes, are living it up. Put a hat round for a collection for the poor wee soul. 

[ri Alban]

4 hours ago, JamboX2 said:

 

Any party can call it. It was an SNP motion backed by the Tories and Liberals which brought about the end of the Callaghan government. 

 

This idea only Labour can is wrong.

 

If others called it Labour would be bounced into it.

It was a Tory motion, which the SNP backed because Labour's betrayal of Scotland. 

[ri Alban]

2 hours ago, JyTees said:

 

I witness it with my own eyes on a daily basis. First hand. I don't need doctored stats and targets to tell me everything in the garden is rosey. It's far from it.

 

Like I said before, not the thread for this but no amount of statistical analysis or figures being bent to suit a political agenda will alter my opinion on the matter. I'll trust my own real life observations thanks.

 

Maybe you're the problem. Up your game .

[Hasselhoff]

14 hours ago, coconut doug said:

If you had taken the trouble to read the introduction to the statistics https://www.gov.scot/publications/achievement-curriculum-excellence-cfe-levels-2017-18/pages/3/ you would have read the following - A pupil is reported to have achieved the expected level in Literacy if they have achieved the expected level in all three of the literacy organisers: reading, writing, listening and talking. Pupils will not be included in this calculation if ‘Not Assessed’ (Code 99) has been reported in one or more of the organisers. Therefore, this percentage will generally be lower than performance reported in three literacy organisers individually.

   This statement renders the statistic you quote virtually meaningless

This collective statistic (literacy) was not collated in or before 2016 so can hardly be used to show declining standards. The components of literacy were collated though and surprisingly they show improvement. Reading up from 72 to 79, writing up from 65 to 73 and listening and talking up from 77 to 84. Is Nicola to be congratulated for this or are these improvements not fast enough for you? I await your response with interest.

 

You say "surprisingly they show improvement". So you expected them to be getting worse too but the results weren't what you expected? 

 

Maybe this is why: 

"It is based on teacher professional judgements regarding pupils’ achievement in literacy and numeracy against CfE levels"

 

Proper global benchmarks are based on actual assessments of students skills but you think we should believe the opinions of Scottish teachers about their pupils? Hardly the most accurate say to measure something. 

 

The following article will give you all the info you need to show education has suffered under the SNP. 

 

https://chokkablog.blogspot.com/2017/06/scottish-education-generation-failed.html?m=1

[SE16 3LN]

12 hours ago, Ulysses said:

 

You said something.  I quoted what you said and commented.  Nothing personal meant here, but you need to say what you mean, and mean what you say. 

 

I'm not absolutely disgusted with you, nor am I ashamed of myself - but if you want to react in such an OTT way there's not much I can do about that. 

You took one sentence to change the meaning and then attempted to take the piss. Its a small minded game for a small minded man. Do one

[Sidelight]

9 minutes ago, SE16 3LN said:

You took one sentence to change the meaning and then attempted to take the piss. Its a small minded game for a small minded man. Do one

I know what you mean, but remember its just is a message board, a medium where a person’s insecurities are often amplified. And sticks are often incorrectly held.

Edited December 13, 2018 by alfajambo