Brexit
 

I am kind of surprised that we did not have a thread dedicated to this before.


This seems to be a relevant question once again.

Idiots. All of them. This is why you don’t trust the electorate with open ended complex decisions. Thanks Cameron.

Brexit/Trump has to be the greatest intelligence operation of all time. It's amazing how easily the Russians fucked up the West.

Doesn't help to then have no cohesive strategy/plan to actually follow through on said decision (which, unless i misremember, was supported in principle by the major players in government ?).

Eh, I kind of like this approach. We should have probably taken a solid two years after the election to transition to the Trump presidency.

Sounds like the vote will go against PM May.

submarine made of cheese

Her submarine of cheese is full of holes. If I were in charge you can be sure we'd have much better cheese submarines.

What domyou expect when the leader of the government was in the Remain camp, and the leader of the opposition was (privately) in the Leave camp.

Clusterfuck all round, so no one will get what they want, and parliament is doing is damnedest to run any sense of credibility, representation or mandate that they have.

Althouhg she was dealt an impossible hand, May should resign, she’s a terrible leader who has overseen or held poor negotiations both with the EU and parliament.

However, ironically that would increase the chances of staying in the EU: I do think she’s trying to reflect the will of the referendum - she just has no conviction and is incompetent

It's been known for months now that the deal will die - my question is, how much will the size of the defeat matter for how this thing stumbles forward?

Lost by 226. Completely unheard of. No confidence motion been tabled.

What a complete clusterfuck. There are no good options left and there probably never were.

If it had ever been close, then maybe it would have had some effect,but it was always going to lose by a lot, so the difference between 115 and 230 is zero in this case.

The options now are Article 50 is postponed, or even revoked, and the 52% are livid; or there is a no-deal exit and the 48% are livid, and probably a decent amount of the 52% will not be pleased

Can someone explain to a dumb American what happened today? They voted against leaving? I'm thoroughly confused.

Well this will make for some interesting conversations on my flight to London tomorrow.

The Prime Minister put forward a Brexit deal (because just leaving without a deal would be economically catastrophic). The House of Commons voted against that deal decisively. The deadline for the UK to leave is in a few months. No one (well very few) wants to leave with no deal in place. So... either there is a new election or a new referendum.

Oversimplification alert!

Today’s vote was basically Parliament’s disapproval of the deal that May negotiated. The deal was supposed to define the relationship rules between the UK and the EU. The EU has said that they are not coming back to the negotiating table. At this point, the UK will be leaving (or forced to leave) at the end of March and no one knows what the everyday rules will be for either party after that.

I wish John Oliver wasn't on hiatus right now.

If Corbin actually embraced Remain (and I know he isn't because he's actually a Leaver, but wants a lefty Leave deal), Labour would probably be able to retake government easily in a new election.

The dilemma is that two years ago 52% of the 2nd highest post-war turnout voted to Leave.

Now any GE turnout is likely to be high, but there is no guarantee of this, and although moreyoung voters were remainers, I think it would be closer than people think.

If Corbyn runs against May, he wins.

If the Tories find a credible candidate (tbf I’m not sure who that is) they have at least a fighting chance.

Another factor is that the Tories will lose votes to the far right over this mess, so that will split their vote somewhat

Corbin and May make me feel slightly better about our choices.

Neither is as bad as Trump!

Although having written that, I’m trying to think why. And not coming up with any answers other than “they’re not Trump”...

Still think that’s just about good enough reason, but it’s closer than I thought :D

There's a chance the opposition to Trump is better. With May and Corbyn you guys are fucked.

Bump, yes there is... answering both the above and my question in the Trump thread.

Repeating what reply to Marc in the Trump thread, no, it wasn’t your link I was referring to, it was Super Ugly’s link that just ever so slightly partisan.

With regards to Ireland, maybe I wasn’t clear - by removing the backstop I’m talking about the ‘insurance policy’ that means the EU can simply say ‘no that’s not acceptable’ forever regardless of the validity of the proposal. It in essence means that the UK could be held to EU rules forever, without any opportunity to influence these EU rules as at least we have now.

That’s why it’s unacceptable to leave the backstop in, and why staying completely is better than signing the current deal. I don’t blame the EU, it’s an excellent possibility from the EUs POV.

But something needs to be there: there has to be something definitive for the Irish border, or more pertinently to avoid an Irish border if that is what the majority of Irish want.

While I agree that a hard border would almost certainly be a disaster for the GFA and be a target, I am not convinced the current small spike (but a spike nonetheless and compared to basically zero for the last good few years) is directly as a result of Brexit - it seems like everything negative that happens is ‘obviously down to Brexit’ for some, while anything positive that happens is glossed over or coincidental

What is true is that there is huge uncertainty at the moment: that is the biggest issue. The government has been terrible throughout the process, MPs have been terrible throughout the process, and until as a group they can do what they should have done months ago and come together to represent a single viewpoint, it will continue to be uncertainty that rules.

The EU have a single platform - it doesn’t want the UK to leave, and tbh the most pro-EU I have been is down to the way the negotiators have generally been consistent and professional, especially in comparison to the likes of Davis and Raab, and Parliament in general.

Hi AlexB. I appreciate that the writing is emotive (unhelpfully so, but understandable after 2.5 years of this shit), the author of that blog is a highly regarded economist with a reputation for being utterly scrupulous in his handling of data. If you don't like him then take your pick of his peers. Ignoring the occasional wingnut (hello Patrick Minford), as a profession they are overwhelmingly of the opinion that Brexit is an utter clusterfuck.

Agreed. Just about every economist I've seen have said Brexit is an economic disaster for the UK. Increasing protectionism (as Brexit is) generally is. It is even worse if you have no plan in place regarding how to deal with the issues.

Now there are reports that there's a plan to evacuate the Queen if Brexit sparks large protests.

You can really stop punching yourself in the junk, UK. You don't have to do this.

That would make for a great movie.

Punching yourself in the junk?

Enjoy. I'll pass, thank you.

Instead of 'Escape from New York' ... 'Escape to New England' ? ... ;)

(I'll get my coat :D )

I was actually thinking of a sequel to "London has Fallen". Great action movie!

Brexit is an extraordinary example of why you shouldn't let the (mostly) uneducated masses decide fundamental questions of policy... The details escape me (and not going to google it sitting on the train on my phone), but it reminds me of the story of the Greeks living in Persia that sailed across to Greece to try and gain support for an invasion of Persia. They met with a few kings of Sparta etc. who all declined, then went to a democratic city and told an assembled crowd that there would be much treasure to be won and they all enthusiastically joined and sailed off to their deaths.

This guy gets it. Completely self destructive and unnecessary. The damage to the UK economy will last generations. I'm sure Toyota pulling out of a 60 million pound plant in the North East and all the banks scrambling to be the last ones out of London before the light goes off aren't an ominous sign.

There's no good answer at this point. Another referendum isn't it and tears the country apart for 20 years. I suspect there will be a deal cobbled together that is basically the same as on the table now but there will be some softening of the backstop argument that allows everyone to save face, but a no deal is still a realistic outcome. Cameron, Corbyn and Clegg (the Killer C's) have absolutely set the UK back decades and decades. And yes, I do include Clegg in that for enabling Cameron and destroying the Lib Dems at a time where a sane third option in parliament would have brought the country back from the brink.

I don't live in the UK and don't know enough to really comment intelligently on the pros-and-cons but your statement was an interesting one and had to google on it.

I am probably more sympathetic to staying vs leaving so don't get me wrong, I just wanted to understand better this relationship.

FWIW

Brexit was not the voice of the working class nor of the uneducated – it was of the squeezed middle | British Politics and Policy at LSE

When I say uneducated, I'm not talking about people who bombed out of high school or never attended university. I'm talking about regular people voting on issues they know next to nothing about based on emotion. Politicians have direct access to experts on any subject... whether they use them or not is another question, but THAT's what people should be voting on, not direct matters of policy. It's incredibly reckless and could absolutely ruin the UK.

Ah, my bad, sorry.

I was drawing a parallel to what some people allude to re: Trump supporters.

Brexit adjacent.

Seven MPs leave Labour Party in protest at Jeremy Corbyn's leadership - BBC News

0-2 with two strikeouts for PM May

I don't get it, seriously. Are we really in a position where, because we can't find an outcome enough people are willing to accept, that the worst possible scenario is now being sought out - and cheered by a substantial amount of Parliament it would seem??

If by worst possible scenario you mean no-deal, don’t think it will happen. My bet is that by hook or crook (mostly the latter) we’ll stay in the EU.

AlexB, correct me if I am wrong but I don't remember any talks about any deals pre the Brexit vote. I thought it was a simple leave or stay and then once the break was completed then it was time to deal negotiations.

The vote was just to trigger the article that set a date for leaving IIRC, the rest was completely vague and uncharted territory. Which is reason #18657 having a simple binary vote on something so legally complicated and relatively unprecedented was such a spectacularly awful decision. Brexit as a simple leave/remain scenario was dead when May called an early election and managed to decrease her majority and had to rely on a bunch of lunatic Unionists, and then when legally she had to get her deal through the Commons, but even if she had just been able to push the button and leave, I don't think she'd have had the guts to do it under the current deal as she would have guaranteed a generation of Tory losses and would have been responsible for the break up of the union. There's just no good options left on the table and probably never were to be honest.

As for the extension, fuck knows what is going to happen now. There's very little incentive for the EU to approve a short extension as it's just extending the uncertainty that is affecting their individual countries, but equally no-deal is a disaster for both sides. If I had to bet I'd guess we're heading to a longer extension with a UK general election and an implicit understanding that there may be a second referendum, but like I said. Way past the point now where there's any good solution that isn't completely unpalatable to most people.

You’re right, and bhlloy summed it up pretty well.

I think short term MPs will vote tonight to remove no-deal from the options, so we will be left in a position with no leverage.

The UK will effectively be saying to the EU we definitely won’t be leaving without a deal, but we don’t like this deal, and you won’t negotiate a new deal, so can we have an extension? To which they will quite rightly say ‘Why, what’s the point’, and so everything will be in limbo.

Although if this process does play out, the end result will be that we will have to leave with no deal I guess? So does that mean a no-deal is more likely? Or does it mean what I suspect and we’ll ed up staying in the EU?

In my mind though, if we’re going to leave, no-deal has to be left on the table in order to act as leverage for further negotiations and extension of Article 50. Otherwise the only option left is whatever the political equivalent is of kids keeping saying ‘please’ until parents relent.

Again, I think everyone agrees, regardless of Leave/Remain, the whole thing has been a clusterfuck, particularly from the House of Commons.

Yeah, I'd go a step further and say (as much as it terrifies me) that no-deal is the ONLY option that remotely results in the UK leaving the EU under anything close to the intent of the UK people when they (in my opinion idiotically) voted to leave the EU.

To me two truths are completely undeniable at this point, and probably should have been all along

1) There is no deal that can possibly satisfy the EU and the UK's competing desires and demands. I read a number of EU politicians essentially say "the Brexit that was promised to the British people was a pipe dream" today and I couldn't agree more. Essentially what was sold was we can keep the bits we like about EU membership today (trade, investment, free movement for us) and get rid of the bits we don't like (paying out, all these damn Polish people, restrictive rules and regulations) and everyone will just go along with it and cheerily wave us goodbye. That was never remotely realistic, and I can't see a deal without complete capitulation from the EU that will ever achieve those goals and get the majority of people behind it. And as that capitulation essentially heralds the end of the EU, there's less than a 0% chance it's coming.

2) No deal would be absolutely disastrous for the UK and should be avoided at all costs.

I think 1) has pretty much been proven at this point, the only way forward is to figure out if the country agrees with 2) in a new referendum. It's not a good option but it's the least bad one. There's not a politician on the planet that can sort this shit out now.

May voted against her own motion on Brexit, which I'm sure is going to make her even more popular.

Maybe I just don't get how the referendum or English politics work, but how is that even an option? I thought leaving was mandated as a result of the referendum, no matter how ridiculous or stupid the outcome, and that the only question was when & how? If it's not, then why did anyone ever even care what the results of the referendum were, if following through on them is optional? Yeah I'm basically just totally confused here.

Join the rest of us!

Not saying that's how it should work, but my gut feel is that the Commons will disregard the referendum (the removal of no-deal from the table is the first significant step towards that IMO) and the impasse* can only be solved by pulling the political equivalent of the Dallas Dream Season.

*We won't leave without a deal
*We won't approve the current deal
*The EU won't renegotiate the current deal
*The EU have no reason to renegotiate now that no-deal is no longer a threat
*The EU has no reason to extend Article 50 if there's no renegotiation required
*Only remaining solution is to stay in the EU

Although the Tory government promised to implement the result of the referendum (largely as they thought Leave had no chance of winning), the 'out' is that the referendum wasn't actually legally binding.

So my prediction is that there will some political shenanigans justifying that the above impasse (which the MPs themselves have created) means the referendum result has to be ignored, and the last 2 years will prove to have been a waste of time and money.

Dola, now it appears the deal will be voted on again, for the third time, so now that no-deal is out (although all of these votes have been non-binding too) then maybe the harder Brexiteers will vote for the deal on the basis it's the best that they will get?

TBF I don't care anymore: everything except the fug around the Irish backstop is OK from I have read in this deal, and from what the DPP said, that hasn't changed much, so it still could just leave us as a vassal state.

If that is the case we should stay, as better to be part of something we can influence rather than be effectively part of something that we can't

Don't forget the calls to forget the bitterness on both sides of the debate and united as one.