Brexit Deal agreed ( updated )

[Ulysses]

47 minutes ago, Dannie Boy said:

 

To be honest I’ve never bothered following it over the years but from the recent reports they have in instances. I remember one where (not specifically) where there went into the wee small hours to thrash out a deal. I’m sure there are others. Put it this way if push comes to shove I’m sure that despite the collective  rhetoric  a deal will be reach. It may even be that the UK Parliament bites the bullet and accepts the Back Stop. 

 

It it suits me fine if the plug was pulled and we stayed in. I’m here in Tenerife for six weeks and booked another four weeks in September, despite the uncertainty, enjoying the freedom that being in the EU gives me. I would have bought an apartment but got cold feet at the last minute due to Brexit and the uncertainty it has created. 

 

 

So, no specific example then.

 

Can you give a couple of examples of where the EU did last-minute deals for outsiders, for non-members?  If you can't, can you please stop repeating it as if it were true?

[Ulysses]

16 minutes ago, Mikey1874 said:

 

No. Its an extension of the transition period. Would still leave on 29 March. Still needs Parliament agreement.

 

It's a plan put forward behind the last vote May won. 

 

Can you read the article again?  Specifically, this bit:

 

"Replacing the 21-month transition period with extra time as a member state would allow the UK and the EU to develop their plans for the future relationship with the aim of making the contentious Irish backstop redundant."

 

Whether the piece is right, wrong, speculative or cast-iron accurate, it clearly says "replacing".

[Cade]

May concluded the deal with the EU without parliamentary approval.

 

The deal is done. The fact that the UK is still pissing about with it at home is neither here nor there.

The only talks going on are how to repackage the wording of the backstop so make it sound like it's not there.

But it will be.

Because the deal has been made.

 

If the UK decides to renege on the deal, the shite hits the fan.

[The Mighty Thor]

23 minutes ago, Cade said:

May concluded the deal with the EU without parliamentary approval.

 

The deal is done. The fact that the UK is still pissing about with it at home is neither here nor there.

The only talks going on are how to repackage the wording of the backstop so make it sound like it's not there.

But it will be.

Because the deal has been made.

 

If the UK decides to renege on the deal, the shite hits the fan.

But not til the 12th March or if she could get away with it the 28th March 

[Don Dan]

57 minutes ago, Cade said:

May concluded the deal with the EU without parliamentary approval.

 

The deal is done. The fact that the UK is still pissing about with it at home is neither here nor there.

The only talks going on are how to repackage the wording of the backstop so make it sound like it's not there.

But it will be.

Because the deal has been made.

 

If the UK decides to renege on the deal, the shite hits the fan.

 

A final withdrawal treaty and transition deal will have to be ratified by the EU nations and the UK Parliament, before the UK leaves in March 2019.

 

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.bbc.co.uk/news/amp/uk-politics-42277040

It was ratified by the EU nations,

it wasn’t ratified by the UK parliament.

 

[The Real Maroonblood]

4 hours ago, Dusk_Till_Dawn said:

The entire country should be on the streets about this. She’s playing a ridiculous game of brinksmanship.

It would probably happen in other countries .

 

[Don Dan]

1 hour ago, Ulysses said:

 

 

So, no specific example then.

 

Can you give a couple of examples of where the EU did last-minute deals for outsiders, for non-members?  If you can't, can you please stop repeating it as if it were true?

 

There has been a few non specific claims on this thread about Brexit. 

Its a discussion thread not an examination. 

My point about last minute deals is not unique and it’s based on what I’ve heard said by politicians and commentators in the past. 

David Davis (remember him) said that the EU would hold out till the last minute. I suspect they will. The other thing that might happen is that there will be a majority when the UK get round to ratifing the transition deal in what ever form

it eventually takes. 

Its interesting that there is talk of binning the transition deal and going straight to a trade deal of some sort. That would seem a way round the need for a back stop and a hard border.

 

Edited February 24, 2019 by Dannie Boy

[Ulysses]

26 minutes ago, Dannie Boy said:

 

There has been a few non specific claims on this thread about Brexit. 

Its a discussion thread not an examination. 

My point about last minute deals is not unique and it’s based on what I’ve heard said by politicians and commentators in the past. 

David Davis (remember him) said that the EU would hold out till the last minute. I suspect they will. The other thing that might happen is that there will be a majority when the UK get round to ratifing the transition deal in what ever form

it eventually takes. 

Its interesting that there is talk of binning the transition deal and going straight to a trade deal of some sort. That would seem a way round the need for a back stop and a hard border.

 

 

 

David Davis couldn't find his political arse with both hands and a satnav.  No-one except an extreme optimist would base their political suspicions about the EU on anything he says.

 

Several people have said that the EU is "known for last-minute deals".  The EU has shown considerable flexibility and innovation in negotiations within its own ranks, but it isn't known for that when dealing with outsiders.  The UK is no longer in the ranks, so the EU will treat the UK like an outsider.  If anyone who believes in the EU's "well-known" capacity for last-minute deals wants to show some evidence for it let them do so.  Otherwise they're being hopeful, which is nice, but with no evidence to support their hope.

 

The transition agreement is supposed to be temporary and cover a period of 21 months to give time to negotiate a more permanent future relationship.  What is being suggested now according to the Guardian is dropping that idea and replacing it with the UK staying in membership of the EU for 21 months to give time to negotiate a more permanent future relationship.  It's obvious why the EU might suggest that - it's easier and better for them than either a hard Brexit or the transition deal.  But why would the UK go along with it?  What benefit is there for the UK?  The extremists of the ERG won't accept it.  It's doubtful the PM herself would accept it.  And in any case the UK hasn't been able to present any concrete and plausible plan for how to make a "soft" land frontier work post-Brexit so far.  If the UK couldn't do that in 23 months since Article 50 was invoked, does anyone seriously believe they can do it in another 21 months?

Edited February 24, 2019 by Ulysses

[scott herbertson]

1 hour ago, Dannie Boy said:

 

There has been a few non specific claims on this thread about Brexit. 

Its a discussion thread not an examination. 

My point about last minute deals is not unique and it’s based on what I’ve heard said by politicians and commentators in the past. 

David Davis (remember him) said that the EU would hold out till the last minute. I suspect they will. The other thing that might happen is that there will be a majority when the UK get round to ratifing the transition deal in what ever form

it eventually takes. 

Its interesting that there is talk of binning the transition deal and going straight to a trade deal of some sort. That would seem a way round the need for a back stop and a hard border.

 

 

 

I don’t think you can say the EU is “holding out” - as far as they are concerned the negotiation’s finished. Unless we come up with a new offer there is nothing to negotiate.

[Ulysses]

5 hours ago, Dannie Boy said:

 

I’m here in Tenerife for six weeks and booked another four weeks in September......

 

 

Ah here, why are you in the Canaries for weeks and I'm not?  ****ing BOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO.

[Ulysses]

6 hours ago, Captain Sausage said:

It speaks volumes for how ineffective Corbyn is when arguably the worst prime minister in British politics is going almost unchallenged. 

 

[Harry Potter]

14 hours ago, Dannie Boy said:

 

Happens a lot when there’s negotiations. 

That seems to be lost on most folk, 

[Francis Albert]

26 minutes ago, Harry Potter said:

That seems to be lost on most folk, 

That negotiations frequently, if not usually, go to the wire is known by anyone who has ever been involved in negotiating anything of any importance or complexity. 

The ignorance of the many MPs who think we should formally rule out no deal is astonishing. But in fact I can't believe it is ignorance - even MPs can't be that stupid? It is simply another tactic to stop Brexit.

Edited February 25, 2019 by Francis Albert

[Harry Potter]

32 minutes ago, Francis Albert said:

That negotiations frequently, if not usually, go to the wire is known by anyone who has ever been involved in negotiating anything of any importance or complexity. 

The ignorance of the many MPs who think we should formally rule out no deal is astonishing. But in fact I can't believe it is ignorance - even MPs can't be that stupid? It is simply another tactic to stop Brexit.

Spot on Francis.

[Mikey1874]

1 hour ago, Francis Albert said:

That negotiations frequently, if not usually, go to the wire is known by anyone who has ever been involved in negotiating anything of any importance or complexity. 

The ignorance of the many MPs who think we should formally rule out no deal is astonishing. But in fact I can't believe it is ignorance - even MPs can't be that stupid? It is simply another tactic to stop Brexit.

 

But the whole problem with that is the expense and uncertainty. Should all have been agreed a year before leave date. 

 

Billions have been spent preparing for No Deal. Money that most likely will be wasted. And the time and wasted opportunities for investment etc. And of course all mostly because the Conservative party and government couldn't agree what it wanted. Which is quite helpful for anyone negociating. 

 

Playing poker with the whole country. 

[XB52]

There are no negotiations end of story. What is so hard to understand?? 

[Mikey1874]

14 hours ago, Ulysses said:

 

Can you read the article again?  Specifically, this bit:

 

"Replacing the 21-month transition period with extra time as a member state would allow the UK and the EU to develop their plans for the future relationship with the aim of making the contentious Irish backstop redundant."

 

Whether the piece is right, wrong, speculative or cast-iron accurate, it clearly says "replacing".

 

Cheers. My mistake.

 

Interesting that there is no mention of it today in the various options discussed including a short extension to Article 50. 

 

I was aware an extension to Dec 2021 was part of the proposals behind the Brady amendment that passed a few weeks ago. BBC got a screenshot of a document that included this. That is why I think it is credible. And that it's not simply an EU initiated suggestion.

 

It would make sense. It would resolve many of the blockages albeit the actual relationship - customs union etc - remains difficult for the Conservatives to agree and deliver. 

 

Wait and see if it comes out more. 

Edited February 25, 2019 by Mikey1874

[Jamboelite]

18 hours ago, Dannie Boy said:

 

I hope your right. 

The EU have history of last minute deals. 

My hope and I think it will happen is a second referendum and Remain wins which I’m sure it will.

 

That's my wish as well but I think its unlikely, lets be clear though by the time we get to the 12th and still nothing has moved then there is absolutely nothing to suggest any deal is going to be renegotiated or a last minute folding.

 

As noted it sends completely the wrong message to other EU nations.

 

Its going to be a half arsed extension to article 50  and then we kick this can further down the road.

 

Its like the EU is holding a full house and already knows you're playing with a K high hand.

 

[Joey J J Jr Shabadoo]

3 hours ago, Mikey1874 said:

 

But the whole problem with that is the expense and uncertainty. Should all have been agreed a year before leave date. 

 

Billions have been spent preparing for No Deal. Money that most likely will be wasted. And the time and wasted opportunities for investment etc. And of course all mostly because the Conservative party and government couldn't agree what it wanted. Which is quite helpful for anyone negociating. 

 

Playing poker with the whole country. 

Not quite, the MPs' pensions will be protected, no matter what. They have nothing to lose. Unfortunately, some are too ignorant, etc to realise this. 

[Ulysses]

2 hours ago, Mikey1874 said:

 

Cheers. My mistake.

 

Interesting that there is no mention of it today in the various options discussed including a short extension to Article 50. 

 

I was aware an extension to Dec 2021 was part of the proposals behind the Brady amendment that passed a few weeks ago. BBC got a screenshot of a document that included this. That is why I think it is credible. And that it's not simply an EU initiated suggestion.

 

It would make sense. It would resolve many of the blockages albeit the actual relationship - customs union etc - remains difficult for the Conservatives to agree and deliver. 

 

Wait and see if it comes out more. 

 

RTÉ News are suggesting that an extension is a possibility.

 

http://www.rte.ie/news/brexit/2019/0225/1032613-brexit/

 

Leo Varadkar "senses" an extension. On the other hand, the PM makes the valid point that all you get from a delay is exactly that, a delay.

[NANOJAMBO]

3 hours ago, XB52 said:

There are no negotiations end of story. What is so hard to understand?? 

This. The EU has been saying it since the catastrophic defeat  for May in December and they say it every week.  May needs to be in Brussels offering meaningful negotiations but she's in Egypt pretending she's cosying up to Merkel. The statement from the Dutch  PM I saw at lunchtime was a withering attack on May and the UK brinksmanship - the EU will not back down. 

 

IDS was in Ireland last week saying Ireland faces a catastrophe for it's economy if there is no deal , forgetting to mention that UK faces a similar fate. Hunt was in Slovenia upsetting the locals trying to get some support. His statements about Slovenia being a "former Soviet vassal state" went down like a lead balloon. UK ministers have been in Germany and got nowhere. 

 

The one thing that comes thru in the UK media is that it's all the EUs fault, THEY need to back down and give May what she wants. Gove was on BBC yesterday warning that tariffs will be on the table if there is no deal - so much for the unicorns & rainbows we were being promised under WTO rules. 

[doctor jambo]

26 minutes ago, NANOJAMBO said:

This. The EU has been saying it since the catastrophic defeat  for May in December and they say it every week.  May needs to be in Brussels offering meaningful negotiations but she's in Egypt pretending she's cosying up to Merkel. The statement from the Dutch  PM I saw at lunchtime was a withering attack on May and the UK brinksmanship - the EU will not back down. 

 

IDS was in Ireland last week saying Ireland faces a catastrophe for it's economy if there is no deal , forgetting to mention that UK faces a similar fate. Hunt was in Slovenia upsetting the locals trying to get some support. His statements about Slovenia being a "former Soviet vassal state" went down like a lead balloon. UK ministers have been in Germany and got nowhere. 

 

The one thing that comes thru in the UK media is that it's all the EUs fault, THEY need to back down and give May what she wants. Gove was on BBC yesterday warning that tariffs will be on the table if there is no deal - so much for the unicorns & rainbows we were being promised under WTO rules. 

I don't understand why its so difficult.

Nor why tariffs need applied!

Surely we could just set NO tariffs on EU goods, and they could reciprocate- though obviously we would need to apply a caveat that any goods entering UK from outside EU would have to comply to EU standards or they would not be allowed to exit the UK- ie if you imported non EU goods you would need to declare those goods to any EU country you had export business to.

And we would, obviously, continue free movement of people

[XB52]

1 hour ago, doctor jambo said:

I don't understand why its so difficult.

Nor why tariffs need applied!

Surely we could just set NO tariffs on EU goods, and they could reciprocate- though obviously we would need to apply a caveat that any goods entering UK from outside EU would have to comply to EU standards or they would not be allowed to exit the UK- ie if you imported non EU goods you would need to declare those goods to any EU country you had export business to.

And we would, obviously, continue free movement of people

Good idea but this would never be accepted by leavers or the tories. It's really just eu without a say in anything

[doctor jambo]

36 minutes ago, XB52 said:

Good idea but this would never be accepted by leavers or the tories. It's really just eu without a say in anything

No, it’s not.

we could do deals with anyone we wanted, BUT would not be able to send said goods into the EU.

there would be no irish border.

anyone exporting into the EU would sign a declaration there were no non- eu complaint parts in their goods.

we can track meat/eggs etc from field to plate.

 

[Cade]

Labour pushing amendments to propose a soft Brexit.

Also come out in favour of a people's vote.

 

[Martin_T]

8 hours ago, Francis Albert said:

That negotiations frequently, if not usually, go to the wire is known by anyone who has ever been involved in negotiating anything of any importance or complexity. 

The ignorance of the many MPs who think we should formally rule out no deal is astonishing. But in fact I can't believe it is ignorance - even MPs can't be that stupid? It is simply another tactic to stop Brexit.

 

It's not a second hand car sale negotiation though is it, where the buyer has no consequences from walking away with no deal.

 

No deal in this context probably means severe economic damage, job losses, supply chain problems (including medicines) which will have direct negative impact on actual people.

 

To rule out no deal is quite frankly the decent thing to do.

[Victorian]

The EU is now overtly proposing a postponement in order to prevent a no-deal.     The reason is no more mysterious than the obvious.     That there are two possibilities as it stands.     UK parliament votes through 'the deal,    or no-deal.      Further negotiated alterations are NOT on the menu.     The EU knows full well that May cannot get 'the deal' through parliament,   leaving no-deal as the final remaining eventuality.     The EU doesn't want a disorderly exit so it is trying to spoon feed the UK into doing what it should be doing for itself.     The PM is resisting because she views deviating from her runaway train strategy as failure.     She is a failure.     She'll remain a failure.     The trouble is that a no-deal is the PM's preferred version of failure because it allows her to dump the blame on others.

 

This is all about the PM's ego.   

[doctor jambo]

4 minutes ago, Martin_T said:

 

It's not a second hand car sale negotiation though is it, where the buyer has no consequences from walking away with no deal.

 

No deal in this context probably means severe economic damage, job losses, supply chain problems (including medicines) which will have direct negative impact on actual people.

 

To rule out no deal is quite frankly the decent thing to do.

She cannot rule out no deal, it’s the only decent card she has

[Mikey1874]

5 minutes ago, Victorian said:

The EU is now overtly proposing a postponement in order to prevent a no-deal.     The reason is no more mysterious than the obvious.     That there are two possibilities as it stands.     UK parliament votes through 'the deal,    or no-deal.      Further negotiated alterations are NOT on the menu.     The EU knows full well that May cannot get 'the deal' through parliament,   leaving no-deal as the final remaining eventuality.     The EU doesn't want a disorderly exit so it is trying to spoon feed the UK into doing what it should be doing for itself.     The PM is resisting because she views deviating from her runaway train strategy as failure.     She is a failure.     She'll remain a failure.     The trouble is that a no-deal is the PM's preferred version of failure because it allows her to dump the blame on others.

 

This is all about the PM's ego.   

 

3 minutes ago, doctor jambo said:

She cannot rule out no deal, it’s the only decent card she has

 

But behind the scenes May has promised they will avoid No Deal. 

 

If I know that so does the EU. 

[Norm]

Just now, doctor jambo said:

She cannot rule out no deal, it’s the only decent card she has

It's the best card she has but it's still a shitty card though. Essentially we're threatening to slap them in the face with our severed penis. Sure, no one wants slapped in the face with a severed penis. But it's clear that they'll be better off than we will. 

[Mikey1874]

28 minutes ago, Cade said:

Labour pushing amendments to propose a soft Brexit.

Also come out in favour of a people's vote.

 

 

Timing is everything 

[Mikey1874]

Just now, Normthebarman said:

It's the best card she has but it's still a shitty card though. Essentially we're threatening to slap them in the face with our severed penis. Sure, no one wants slapped in the face with a severed penis. But it's clear that they'll be better off than we will. 

 

Top analogy 

[Victorian]

The EU has already shredded the no deal card.     It is quite clear from the EU that the threat of no deal as a bargaining chip is obsolete because no deal is unavoidable as we stand.      They're prepared for it.    No deal would cause significantly more disruption for the UK than it would in the EU.

 

A threat issued on the premise of the other party being able to offer more is one thing.    A threat issued in the reality of the other side's pockets being empty is in fact,   an empty threat.

[Martin_T]

4 minutes ago, doctor jambo said:

She cannot rule out no deal, it’s the only decent card she has

 

Well then she's an even worse human being than I suspected.

 

If I'm unable to get my medication because of supply chain issues but caused by a no deal, I and thousands of others like me will suffer terribly.

[Victorian]

6 minutes ago, Mikey1874 said:

 

 

But behind the scenes May has promised they will avoid No Deal. 

 

If I know that so does the EU. 

 

Speculation.    But even if true to whatever degree,   it's quite clear that a disorderly Brexit is May's 'least worse option' of failure.    She would have remained 'strong' in her strategy and the blame game will see the shit fired at all and sundry others.     

Edited February 25, 2019 by Victorian

[Mikey1874]

2 minutes ago, Victorian said:

 

Speculation.    But even if true to whatever degree,   it's quite clear that a disorderly Brexit is May's 'least worse option' of failure.    She would have remained 'strong' in her strategy and the blame game will see the shit fired at all and sundry others.     

 

No

 

The disruption of No Deal will force the government out by 3pm on 30 March. 

[Victorian]

1 minute ago, Mikey1874 said:

 

No

 

The disruption of No Deal will force the government out by 3pm on 30 March. 

 

Bullying parliament into voting the current deal through is more likely to bring down the government.     A no-deal changes very little in the way of any future no confidence motion.   

[Mikey1874]

4 minutes ago, Victorian said:

 

Bullying parliament into voting the current deal through is more likely to bring down the government.     A no-deal changes very little in the way of any future no confidence motion.   

 

Chaos in the country will be an issue for a government that has mishandled the whole thing. 

 

But it is not happening it would seem so May is safe for now. 

[Trapper John McIntyre]

28 minutes ago, Martin_T said:

 

Well then she's an even worse human being than I suspected.

 

If I'm unable to get my medication because of supply chain issues but caused by a no deal, I and thousands of others like me will suffer terribly.

**** Me. Look at me drama queenery of epic proportion.

 

Sort yourself out, mate.

 

PS this thread is nothing but a mutual spunkery of hard left, anti UK, Anti Brexit, anti Labour, anti Tory, pro Scotgnat  pseudo intellectual pishwater.

 

 

 

 

[The Mighty Thor]

25 minutes ago, Mikey1874 said:

 

No

 

The disruption of No Deal will force the government out by 3pm on 30 March. 

 

23 minutes ago, Victorian said:

 

Bullying parliament into voting the current deal through is more likely to bring down the government.     A no-deal changes very little in the way of any future no confidence motion.   

It's irrelevant. 

A no deal or a no confidence vote would perhaps force another GE but the Tories are so far ahead they'd waltz back into number 10 unhindered.

 

Regardless the question, Jeremy Corbyn is not the answer.

[Victorian]

1 minute ago, Trapper John McIntyre said:

**** Me. Look at me drama queenery of epic proportion.

 

Sort yourself out, mate.

 

PS this thread is nothing but a mutual spunkery of hard left, anti UK, Anti Brexit, anti Labour, anti Tory, pro Scotgnat  pseudo intellectual pishwater.

 

 

 

 

 

[Victorian]

1 minute ago, The Mighty Thor said:

 

It's irrelevant. 

A no deal or a no confidence vote would perhaps force another GE but the Tories are so far ahead they'd waltz back into number 10 unhindered.

 

Regardless the question, Jeremy Corbyn is not the answer.

 

Quite possibly true.    Not that May gives a shite either way.     She's soon to do a Cameron nash after whatever mess is left.     Not her problem.

[Jamboelite]

13 minutes ago, Trapper John McIntyre said:

**** Me. Look at me drama queenery of epic proportion.

 

Sort yourself out, mate.

 

PS this thread is nothing but a mutual spunkery of hard left, anti UK, Anti Brexit, anti Labour, anti Tory, pro Scotgnat  pseudo intellectual pishwater.

 

 

 

 

Well thanks for that contibution to a stimulating debate.

[Martin_T]

21 minutes ago, Trapper John McIntyre said:

**** Me. Look at me drama queenery of epic proportion.

 

Sort yourself out, mate.

 

PS this thread is nothing but a mutual spunkery of hard left, anti UK, Anti Brexit, anti Labour, anti Tory, pro Scotgnat  pseudo intellectual pishwater.

 

 

 

 

 

Supply chain issues for medicines are a very real prospect from a no deal Brexit. Charities which represent those of us with chronic illness are very concerned about it.

 

But if you are pro Brexit and it helps you sleep at night, pretending that this isn't a problem, by all means, go and rest easy.

[Seymour M Hersh]

39 minutes ago, Trapper John McIntyre said:

**** Me. Look at me drama queenery of epic proportion.

 

Sort yourself out, mate.

 

PS this thread is nothing but a mutual spunkery of hard left, anti UK, Anti Brexit, anti Labour, anti Tory, pro Scotgnat  pseudo intellectual pishwater.

 

 

 

 

 

But apart from that.................

[Jambo100]

The U.K. has 22 trade deals and 68 with the E U.All are E U in reality .If we pull out of the E U without a deal all trade deals stop.The U K will become a third world country.Hard border In Ireland 10-15m jobs gone.The U K makes nothing only services and they are going.House prices crash interest rates rocket unemployment sky high ,pensions cut.Moggs will knock on your door and will want his money. Riots in the street Brexit supporters targeted because they are at fault.Not Cameron and his scum.

[doctor jambo]

3 minutes ago, Jambo100 said:

The U.K. has 22 trade deals and 68 with the E U.All are E U in reality .If we pull out of the E U without a deal all trade deals stop.The U K will become a third world country.Hard border In Ireland 10-15m jobs gone.The U K makes nothing only services and they are going.House prices crash interest rates rocket unemployment sky high ,pensions cut.Moggs will knock on your door and will want his money. Riots in the street Brexit supporters targeted because they are at fault.Not Cameron and his scum.

True, but brexiteers canny complain 

[Francis Albert]

7 minutes ago, Jambo100 said:

The U.K. has 22 trade deals and 68 with the E U.All are E U in reality .If we pull out of the E U without a deal all trade deals stop.The U K will become a third world country.Hard border In Ireland 10-15m jobs gone.The U K makes nothing only services and they are going.House prices crash interest rates rocket unemployment sky high ,pensions cut.Moggs will knock on your door and will want his money. Riots in the street Brexit supporters targeted because they are at fault.Not Cameron and his scum.

Congratulations. The most ridiculous claim yet.

[AlimOzturk]

7 minutes ago, Jambo100 said:

The U.K. has 22 trade deals and 68 with the E U.All are E U in reality .If we pull out of the E U without a deal all trade deals stop.The U K will become a third world country.Hard border In Ireland 10-15m jobs gone.The U K makes nothing only services and they are going.House prices crash interest rates rocket unemployment sky high ,pensions cut.Moggs will knock on your door and will want his money. Riots in the street Brexit supporters targeted because they are at fault.Not Cameron and his scum.

 

That wouldn't happen and is juat scaremongering in overdrive. 

 

 

[Francis Albert]

2 hours ago, Martin_T said:

 

It's not a second hand car sale negotiation though is it, where the buyer has no consequences from walking away with no deal.

 

No deal in this context probably means severe economic damage, job losses, supply chain problems (including medicines) which will have direct negative impact on actual people.

 

To rule out no deal is quite frankly the decent thing to do.

Unfortunately the same principles apply to any negotiation. If you openly commit to having a deal at any cost then you may as well sign a blank piece of paper and ask the other side to fill in the rest.

Even accepting that no deal means what you say it does (which I don't), and if therefore your bottom line is that you must have a deal then unless you want the other side to be free to dictate the terms you can't tell them so. The MPs who want to commit the Government to ruling out a no deal outcome know that and it is IMO a cynical attempt to reverse the Brexit decision without coming out and saying so.

Edited February 25, 2019 by Francis Albert