[Politics] Brexit

Ernest said:

I don't know what to make of May on the TV carrying on with this charade for her deal, surely there has to be someone to lead her off and tell her for her own good to give it up

Click to expand...

vegster said:

I heard an interesting idea on the radio this morning, someone suggested another referendum on the current situation using preferred voting.


The options, subject to debate of course, would be along the lines of....


1, May's deal


2, No deal

3, Urgent renegotiation

4, Stay in EU


Voting would be in whichever preference the individual wanted and so the most favoured option on countbacks wins.


certainly sounds better than the Hell/Handcart/WTO/Crash options at the moment.

Click to expand...

DIFFBROOK said:

She is wedded to it. For her to say otherwise would in effect say that she has been wrong for the past 2 years - in effect a resignation admission.

In the coming weeks there will be massive political change. I cant see how the vote will be carried, so she will have to resign. What happens after that - any ones guess - but I suspect that a peoples vote will offer a way out of the political heat - (except from hard core brexiteers - of which there are only a handful)

Click to expand...

vegster said:

I heard an interesting idea on the radio this morning, someone suggested another referendum on the current situation using preferred voting.


The options, subject to debate of course, would be along the lines of....


1, May's deal


2, No deal

3, Urgent renegotiation

4, Stay in EU


Voting would be in whichever preference the individual wanted and so the most favoured option on countbacks wins.


certainly sounds better than the Hell/Handcart/WTO/Crash options at the moment.

Click to expand...

CHAPPERS said:

Hammond not answering the urgenst question in the Commons about the economic analysis, instead sending junior minister.

Cool.

Click to expand...

WATFORD zero said:

Ah, out of context!

I guessed there must have been a reason, otherwise reading all those quotes, it would be easy to jump to the conclusion that you were a complete moron, and I'm sure that's not the case

Click to expand...

Berty23 said:

3 isn’t an option. So could well end up with the other 3.

Click to expand...

vegster said:

Third IS an option, withdraw article 50 and stay in til renegotiated.

Click to expand...

vegster said:

Third IS an option, withdraw article 50 and stay in til renegotiated.

Click to expand...

Ernest said:

I don't know what to make of May on the TV carrying on with this charade for her deal, surely there has to be someone to lead her off and tell her for her own good to give it up

Click to expand...

Buried in the assumptions of the Whitehall analysis released today is a quietly devastating verdict on Theresa May’s negotiation.

Even if Mrs May gets her plan though parliament next month, it suggests that civil servants are preparing in case she does not get what she wants from Europe in part two of the Brexit negotiations. It envisages partial failure by Mrs May or her successor to negotiate the detailed trade deal based on last weekend’s 26-page political declaration.

The purpose of the 83-page document released this morning is to give an indication — more than a guess but, as the document keeps making clear, less than a forecast — over what will happen next on Brexit under various plans, compared to the status quo of remaining and a no-deal baseline.

It compares what will happen in 15 years to the British economy under Mrs May’s proposed deal — “the modelled white paper”, EEA or single market-style deal which excludes a customs union, Canada-style deal and “modelled no-deal”. This was expected.

Then there is a fifth column, that was not anticipated, inelegantly labelled “Modelled white paper with 50 per cent ‘non tariff barrier’ sensitivity”.

Why is that there? Because the analysis assumes that Mrs May does not get the “frictionless” deal she put forward at Chequers and acknowledges, as the EU did last week, that key assumptions have not yet been accepted.

This would be a big failure: the entire point of her Chequers model was to ensure frictionless supply lines and protect jobs but Whitehall is explicitly contemplating that this does not work.

The introduction to the document makes it clear that Mrs May’s ambition of a “frictionless” deal — notably missing from the UK-EU political declaration — is just an aspiration, despite the word sticking in the government’s public rhetoric.

“The UK has put forward proposals that would enable frictionless trade to be achieved outside the customs union and single market. That is not something that is accepted by everyone in the EU, but the UK has the ability in the future negotiations to continue to work for its objective of achieving frictionless trade,” it says.

The document goes on to justify modelling a partial failure, assuming that the deal will be “including checks at or behind the border and other regulatory costs”. The white paper (Chequers) assumes 0 per cent barriers for UK-EU trade, and the government analysis feels the necessity to model 50 per cent of the additional barriers of a Canada-style deal.

In other words, officials have modelled what happens if Mrs May tries and fails to negotiate frictionless trade and the UK ends up with some checks on goods at the border, tests in factories and different regulatory regimes. Its mere presence is yet another inconvenience for Mrs May, and realism from the heart of Whitehall.

Click to expand...

Publius Ovidius said:

I wouldn't be too sure...to be fair with some of his/ her rankings, a complete moron is actually quite tame.

Click to expand...

Giraffe said:

Long term we could well be better off out of the EU.

Click to expand...

Mellotron said:

There is no basis whatsoever in reality to this statement - if there was even a chance of this, you would be able to very easily and quickly link to plenty of studies.

It's like saying "Maybe there are 50 elephants rampaging through Churchill Square right now."

Click to expand...