Sport2 mins ago
As Good As It Gets, Surely Not
are we to hear it's all a fudge and that we remain tied to the EU, will the Brexiteers and some remainers be happy when the Prime Minister unveils the plans later on this afternoon.
https:/
https:/
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by emmie. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
"Theresa May told MPs at Prime Minister's Questions the UK was "significantly closer" to delivering on the result of the 2016 Brexit vote."
A *** show i kid you not. Get her out.
I thought everyone was aware of these issues.. seems some people, regardless of facts and evident stalling still want to truly believe in this.
A *** show i kid you not. Get her out.
I thought everyone was aware of these issues.. seems some people, regardless of facts and evident stalling still want to truly believe in this.
My sense from PMQs is that Theresa May knows she's running out of time and options. Obviously PMQs is always about not answering questions, but it was a particularly aggressive response from May to any and all Brexit questions.
Wouldn't be surprised to see her go today, if I'm honest, but more likely she'll limp on as always, and take the government down with her.
Wouldn't be surprised to see her go today, if I'm honest, but more likely she'll limp on as always, and take the government down with her.
“…but what Brexiteers certainly missed is that you needed to work out how to achieve leaving before voting for it. Stands to reason that one is better off planning a journey before setting off on it.”
The country has had 33 months to prepare for our departure. Talk of “crashing out” with no deal is utter tosh. You don’t get involved in a crash when you have three years’ notice. More than enough time to state our position, hold to it and prepare for every eventuality. Instead, more than a year was spent “negotiating” how much cash would be extracted from UK taxpayers for the privilege of leaving. Since then the UK government has capitulated to every demand the EU has made. It was clear that these negotiations were only going to end one way because the UK did not make it absolutely crystal clear from the outset that we would leave with no deal if necessary. It has seen political ineptitude, failure and betrayal on an epic scale.
Unfortunately it has been handled by politicians whose heart wasn’t in it (because most of them want to remain), for whom the “long term” is the end of next week and who anyway did not have the negotiating skills required to secure a deal to the UK’s benefit. Remarks such as “The vote was so close that something must be done to please both sides” are nonsense. Nothing would have been done to please the Leavers had the vote gone the other way. Mr Cameron tried that and came back with four-fifths of five-eighths of feck all. Had the vote been reversed we would have simply carried on as before.
“Since crashing out on "no deal" would lead to an inevitable recession,”
What, like a vote to Leave was forecast to do, you mean, Jim? No it would not have been possible to deconstruct the mess that we have got into as a result of our membership in a matter of months, Jim. But sufficient progress could have been made to cope with the immediate problems had work on such plans begun in June 2016. Extending the deadline would be of no benefit unless an absolute threat to leave with no deal is firmly of the table. It must be remembered that the EU runs an £80bn pa trade surplus with the UK and they would be anxious to co-operate with those plans.
If this “deal” is agreed by Parliament the Tories can look forward to a decade in the political wilderness (or until Mr Corbyn spends all the nation’s money – if the EU allows him to - which will probably take less time than that). And they will deserve it.
Unfortunately, 3Ts, rejection of this deal will not see an automatic exit with no deal. Parliament has to vote for that as well and there's no stomach for it. Quite what will happen if it is voted down is anybody's guess.
The country has had 33 months to prepare for our departure. Talk of “crashing out” with no deal is utter tosh. You don’t get involved in a crash when you have three years’ notice. More than enough time to state our position, hold to it and prepare for every eventuality. Instead, more than a year was spent “negotiating” how much cash would be extracted from UK taxpayers for the privilege of leaving. Since then the UK government has capitulated to every demand the EU has made. It was clear that these negotiations were only going to end one way because the UK did not make it absolutely crystal clear from the outset that we would leave with no deal if necessary. It has seen political ineptitude, failure and betrayal on an epic scale.
Unfortunately it has been handled by politicians whose heart wasn’t in it (because most of them want to remain), for whom the “long term” is the end of next week and who anyway did not have the negotiating skills required to secure a deal to the UK’s benefit. Remarks such as “The vote was so close that something must be done to please both sides” are nonsense. Nothing would have been done to please the Leavers had the vote gone the other way. Mr Cameron tried that and came back with four-fifths of five-eighths of feck all. Had the vote been reversed we would have simply carried on as before.
“Since crashing out on "no deal" would lead to an inevitable recession,”
What, like a vote to Leave was forecast to do, you mean, Jim? No it would not have been possible to deconstruct the mess that we have got into as a result of our membership in a matter of months, Jim. But sufficient progress could have been made to cope with the immediate problems had work on such plans begun in June 2016. Extending the deadline would be of no benefit unless an absolute threat to leave with no deal is firmly of the table. It must be remembered that the EU runs an £80bn pa trade surplus with the UK and they would be anxious to co-operate with those plans.
If this “deal” is agreed by Parliament the Tories can look forward to a decade in the political wilderness (or until Mr Corbyn spends all the nation’s money – if the EU allows him to - which will probably take less time than that). And they will deserve it.
Unfortunately, 3Ts, rejection of this deal will not see an automatic exit with no deal. Parliament has to vote for that as well and there's no stomach for it. Quite what will happen if it is voted down is anybody's guess.
Be careful what you wish for, though, JD -- who can possibly replace her, undo all the damage, and find a way out of this mess in -- well, in basically a week?
The mistake, in my view, wasn't necessarily the Leave vote itself, but the hasty and utterly reckless decision to honour that vote as quickly as was possible, without a coherent plan -- then compounding that error with a mindless and stupid decision to hold a snap election.
Once the 2016 referendum happened, it was of course right to do the best to honour it; but the key, in my view, was to acknowledge that it was going to take time, effort, and money to achieve that. Thus, signing A50 notification should have been delayed far longer than it actually was. Or, at the very least, a snap election should have preceded A50 notifcation rather than followed it.
Indeed, perhaps holding the GE first would have delivered the victory May obviously craved.
The mistake, in my view, wasn't necessarily the Leave vote itself, but the hasty and utterly reckless decision to honour that vote as quickly as was possible, without a coherent plan -- then compounding that error with a mindless and stupid decision to hold a snap election.
Once the 2016 referendum happened, it was of course right to do the best to honour it; but the key, in my view, was to acknowledge that it was going to take time, effort, and money to achieve that. Thus, signing A50 notification should have been delayed far longer than it actually was. Or, at the very least, a snap election should have preceded A50 notifcation rather than followed it.
Indeed, perhaps holding the GE first would have delivered the victory May obviously craved.
ttt // Treason May has managed to find a "deal" that neither remainers nor leavers will go for //
nj //Quite what will happen if it is voted down is anybody's guess. //
Yes, perhaps this was the plan all along. As I said on here the day after the referendum, I'll believe brexit is happening when it actually happens.
nj //Quite what will happen if it is voted down is anybody's guess. //
Yes, perhaps this was the plan all along. As I said on here the day after the referendum, I'll believe brexit is happening when it actually happens.
"It was clear that these negotiations were only going to end one way because the UK did not make it absolutely crystal clear from the outset that we would leave with no deal if necessary..."
I don't think May could have been much clearer on that -- the problem is that it's not a threat, because it amounts to "if you don't give me what I want I'll shoot myself", which isn't really going to convince most people.
I don't think May could have been much clearer on that -- the problem is that it's not a threat, because it amounts to "if you don't give me what I want I'll shoot myself", which isn't really going to convince most people.
NJ: //What, like a vote to Leave was forecast to do, you mean, Jim? //
More precisely -- as I'm sure you know -- that was "a vote to leave followed by immediate A50 notification". Since the second part never happened -- because David Cameron walked away, like a coward -- then the forecasts became void. They do, however, remain valid once we actually leave. There's not a single credible reason to believe otherwise. No deal means a vacuum of rules, which leads to chaos, which leads to recession. Everyone knows this, which is -- again -- why "we'll take no deal" was never a threat, ever.
More precisely -- as I'm sure you know -- that was "a vote to leave followed by immediate A50 notification". Since the second part never happened -- because David Cameron walked away, like a coward -- then the forecasts became void. They do, however, remain valid once we actually leave. There's not a single credible reason to believe otherwise. No deal means a vacuum of rules, which leads to chaos, which leads to recession. Everyone knows this, which is -- again -- why "we'll take no deal" was never a threat, ever.
