Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

The Brexit process

mod said:
Can someone please explain to me what would happen if parliament were to reject the governments Brexit plans in the vote?
Click to expand...
No one knows the answer to that.
I think the vote - which Labour think they won the right to- is one based on bluff...who would dare to reject it after two years negotiations?
It would create a lot of problems, thats for sure.
 
  • Like
Reactions: mod
mod said:
Can someone please explain to me what would happen if parliament were to reject the governments Brexit plans in the vote?
Click to expand...

Not sure who, but some Tory yesterday said they could vote on the deal, but not on the concept of leaving which is defo going to happen. So a bit of a pointless vote really.
 
mod said:
Can someone please explain to me what would happen if parliament were to reject the governments Brexit plans in the vote?
Click to expand...

Unless there were some sort of co-ordination with the 27 to put the process on hold, I think there would just be no deal. Perhaps they would go back to negotiations and then return to Parliament with a revised deal or, at the end of the two years, we would just end up leaving without a deal.
 
I think the MP's would fear a backlash - i.e. lose their seats - if they dared to go contra to the general vote results in their constituency- even if the ultimate package presented is miles away from what was presented during the campaign. It will go through, in whatever form it eventually takes I think. We are out, whatever. The deal itself is the only moot left
 
littlebabyjesus said:
One of my fears here is that we're effectively reaching a position of 'no opposition'. The Tories will be negotiating as a de facto govt of national unity.
Click to expand...
Certainly on the implementation of Brexit that is the case - though there will be the chance to let off some hot air in parliament, its ultimately in the Tories hands. Though its not as if Labour has any meaningful disagreements. Keir Starmer basically agrees with what May set out, and even takes some credit for it - though he reckons her position is not Hard Brexit - bit confusing.
 
littlebabyjesus said:
One of my fears here is that we're effectively reaching a position of 'no opposition'. The Tories will be negotiating as a de facto govt of national unity.
Click to expand...
yeh cos the snp have never said anything about that part of the country being vehemently opposed to exit. :facepalm:

the tories will be negotiating as a government but by no means a government of national unity. i would be surprised by so crass a statement if it had come from someone else.
 
ska invita said:
Certainly on the implementation of Brexit that is the case - though there will be the chance to let off some hot air in parliament, its ultimately in the Tories hands. Though its not as if Labour has any meaningful disagreements. Keir Starmer basically agrees with what May set out, and even takes some credit for it - though he reckons her position is not Hard Brexit - bit confusing.
Click to expand...
Isn't that the point, though. They have no meaningful disagreements because they don't want to be seen to be anti-Brexit, and they have now accepted the tory line that last year's vote equals a demand to limit immigration. UKIP really have won on all counts at the moment. It's like a sick genius that they've managed, whether by luck or design, to manipulate the democratic processes in such a way that a minority opinion is forced upon everyone.
 
mod said:
Can someone please explain to me what would happen if parliament were to reject the governments Brexit plans in the vote?
Click to expand...

theoretically the two year negotiation period can be prolonged if the 28 member states want it to be prolonged - my understanding is that there is some quibble over whether the EU commission and the EU Parliament also get a say, taking it to 30 parties, all of whom must agree - however the electoral cycle here, and the mood music we've been hearing from the EU structures and the other member states suggest that the likelyhood of that occuring is limited in the extreme.

so, theoretically the UK and EU could spend 18 months hammering out a deal which parliament then rejects and the UK government then goes back to the EU with a flea in its ear and says 'sorry, this won't swing, can we talk again...', but firstly theres no reason to suggest that the EU countries will be remotely interested in a second negotiation of terms, and secondly the above time constraint makes that a practical impossibility.

you have to consider, first and above all, that A50 was deliberately designed to make leaving as unattractive, and risky as possible for the leaving state, and to ensure that as many cards as possible were held by the remaining states. there are a number of reasons why, in the UK's situation, thats not nearly as true as some commentators think it is, but the process was not designed to be constructive and helpful.

the time contraint - the two years that really just about 18 months - means that on the two year aniversary of A50 being triggered the leaving state just 'falls out' of the EU. leaving the EU often gets presented as being like a divorce, and in many ways it is, but with a divorce you aren't divorced until the Judge says you're divorced, whereas with A50, you leave the EU on the date specified and it doesn't matter if the arrangements are 70% agreed or 100% agreed but not passed into EU law, you cease to be a member at 23.59.59 on the 2nd anniversary of submitting A50.
 
Wasn't it just last week that Sturgeon said that if May went for a 'soft-Brexit' she would refrain from calling for indyref2 for at least a couple of years? Leaving May with fuck all to lose by totally ignoring Scotland.
 
Last edited:
bimble said:
Not everyone's pissed off.
Click to expand...
The majority of people in the uk are pleased, you'd expect. Though its a bit of a honeymoon period - its all cake and eat it talk at the moment - the negative realities are yet to kick in. And they will come. The test will be five years from now.
 
In The Guardian Boris Johnson to France: no WW2-style punishment beatings over Brexit
...
In an extraordinary outburst at a foreign policy conference in Delhi, Johnson said: “If Hollande wants to administer punishment beatings to anybody who seeks to escape [the EU], in the manner of some world war two movie, I don’t think that is the way forward. It’s not in the interests of our friends and partners.”
...
Click to expand...
The man has a genius for careful diplomacy.

Brexit in the mind of Boris.
 
kebabking said:
theoretically the two year negotiation period can be prolonged if the 28 member states want it to be prolonged - my understanding is that there is some quibble over whether the EU commission and the EU Parliament also get a say, taking it to 30 parties, all of whom must agree - however the electoral cycle here, and the mood music we've been hearing from the EU structures and the other member states suggest that the likelyhood of that occuring is limited in the extreme.

so, theoretically the UK and EU could spend 18 months hammering out a deal which parliament then rejects and the UK government then goes back to the EU with a flea in its ear and says 'sorry, this won't swing, can we talk again...', but firstly theres no reason to suggest that the EU countries will be remotely interested in a second negotiation of terms, and secondly the above time constraint makes that a practical impossibility.

you have to consider, first and above all, that A50 was deliberately designed to make leaving as unattractive, and risky as possible for the leaving state, and to ensure that as many cards as possible were held by the remaining states. there are a number of reasons why, in the UK's situation, thats not nearly as true as some commentators think it is, but the process was not designed to be constructive and helpful.

the time contraint - the two years that really just about 18 months - means that on the two year aniversary of A50 being triggered the leaving state just 'falls out' of the EU. leaving the EU often gets presented as being like a divorce, and in many ways it is, but with a divorce you aren't divorced until the Judge says you're divorced, whereas with A50, you leave the EU on the date specified and it doesn't matter if the arrangements are 70% agreed or 100% agreed but not passed into EU law, you cease to be a member at 23.59.59 on the 2nd anniversary of submitting A50.
Click to expand...

What a fucking mess.

I think we should have a civil war.
 
kebabking said:
no ambition. we should have a war with France - nothing nurtures wider European good naturedness than an opportunity to kick the French.
Click to expand...

Well, we've both got nuclear weapons, so it could solve the Brexit conundrum.

In all seriousness, though, don't share this idea with Boris Johnson.
 
Raheem said:
Well, we've both got nuclear weapons, so it could solve the Brexit conundrum.

In all seriousness, though, don't share this idea with Boris Johnson.
Click to expand...

Boris Johnson doesn't lack ambition - and ours are better, i mean obviously ours would better anyway, as they're ours and not the Frenchists', but as an actual point of fact ours are better. the French have more, but ours are better.
 
kebabking said:
Boris Johnson doesn't lack ambition - and ours are better, i mean obviously ours would better anyway, as they're ours and not the Frenchists', but as an actual point of fact ours are better. the French have more, but ours are better.
Click to expand...
A war of some kind would be good cover for this mess. But never pick on somebody your own size. We could join Trump and Putin in turning a suitably puny Balt into a huge golf facility/brothel catering to specialist needs and money laundering.
 
CrabbedOne said:
A war of some kind would be good cover for this mess. But never pick on somebody your own size. We could join Trump and Putin in turning a suitably puny Balt into a huge golf facility/brothel catering to specialist needs and money laundering.
Click to expand...

Dwarf porn and funny money you say? hmmm....
 
I'd argue that stating we're coming out of all existing arrangements is the best possible open negotiating position. When it comes to deciding whether that means we leave the single market, remain would clearly have been for staying so it follows that leave would more than likely mean leaving it, likewise the customs union - this is not some shocking betrayal of the Brexit vote. The Tory Manifesto is irrelevant, and manifesto promises have an unfortunate habit of meaning nothing anyway, not that that is a good thing, see Lib Dems on tuition fees.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

ash
Another Brexit benefit- using Wi-Fi in Europe
2
Replies
51
Views
2K
Elpenor
Elpenor
F
Brexit
2
Replies
35
Views
2K
Smokeandsteam
Smokeandsteam
editor
  • Poll
Do you want a separate Brexit forum?
2 3 4
Replies
97
Views
4K
platinumsage
platinumsage
Serene
So what happened to 350 million a week from brexit being put into the NHS??
2
Replies
31
Views
2K
Pickman's model
Pickman's model
Maggot
  • Locked
Benefits of Brexit
2 3 4
Replies
114
Views
5K
FridgeMagnet
FridgeMagnet
Back
Top Bottom