May determined to make it her deal or no deal. Corbyn has asked for No Confidence motion

May has made it clear that her intent is to force Parliament into the situation where they either vote for her deal or will be left with no deal - as she will consider nothing else. The vote she says will be in the week beginning 14th January.

Corbyn has called for a No Confidence Motion on May - though not on the Tories it will not create a general election.

 

she's implying there are only two but there's the third option, another referendum.

and there should've always been the third option from the beginning, let the people decide if they want to - crash out with no deal - accept the deal - reject the deal and remain in the EU.

May is leaving the vote so late as to make the referendum option impossible... the consequences of Brexit are so serious that it can't be left in the hands of the politicians to make the final decision

 

Yes, that is my thinking too.

 

There is a fourth option - acknowledge that the Brexit that the British public narrowly voted in favour of - the one where we are simultaneously both inside and outside the EEA and Customs Union, the one in which freedom of movement is both preserved and abolished, the one in which there is no way a Romanian who has legally entered Ireland can cross to the UK and there is no hard border between Ireland and Northern Ireland, the one in which billions annually is available for the NHS, the one in which there are no negative economic repercussions, the one in which our diversity is simultaneously protected and darkies are sent back to where they came from - is undeliverable, not least because it contains so many internal contradictions. Grasp that nettle and say that because of that, we're going with the will of 48% and knocking Brexit on the head altogether.

The original referendum was necessarily a binary option, not least because we in the UK had no idea what Brexit deal we wanted, never mind what Brexit deal we could negotiate with the EU. That said, it's pretty clear to me that a significant proportion of Leave voters would reject whatever Brexit we would end up with. Corbynistas would reject a Rees-Mogg deal (and vice versa) and both are unhappy with the proposed Theresa May deal.

My suspicion is that Theresa May has always been a Hard Brexiteer and this whole pantomime is a process to ensure that we crash out of the EU without a deal but in a way that the blame for the inevitable negative consequences can be spread around rather than focused on the government - which reminds me I'll need to stockpile tinfoil for post-Brexit hat making .

 

I have myself suspected she was for Brexit. I definitely agree that this is an attempt to put the blame for Brexit on the whole of Government. That seems kind of obvious. Parliament is beginning to look like a bunch of kids who refuse to take any responsibility.

 

I find the whole thing both utterly bewildering and upsetting.

As I understand it, the majority of Conservative MPs and almost all Labour MPs were pro-Remain prior to the referendum but now the majority in both parties seem to be pro-Brexit. I can understand pro-Remain Conservative MPs being swayed by the referendum result because a majority of Conservative supporters voted Leave. In order to avoid votes being leaked to UKIP or other far-right parties they have traded their convictions for votes, I understand their decision making process - even if I don't agree with it.

OTOH Labour supporters backed Remain by a considerable margin. MPs saying that they are now pro-Brexit sounds to me like turning their back on their own membership in order to court the Conservative and/or UKIP supporters at a time when the party as a whole is adopting more traditionally left-wing policies even less likely to appeal to those same Conservative and/or UKIP supporters. Either the vast majority of Labour Party MPs have had a damascene conversion - in which case I need to hear the compelling case that has suddenly made them so keen on Brexit - or they are voting contrary to their best judgement, against the wishes of their own supporters and risking economic turmoil in an attempt to appeal to voters who would never vote Labour in any case.

 

I didn't realise that. I think possibly it is due to the talk after the vote came when the Leavers managed to get people to think whatever happens because 37% of the British electorate or 52% of those who voted, voted leave that that is what they must do. It was a massive demand for a long time....and then of course the spin that not wanting to do it is suggesting they are stupid - not fed wrong information but stupid. This seems to be what a lot still think. Caroline Flint talks about that here
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/nov/16/labour-mp-deal-no-deal-eu-brexit

I heard yesterday that the supposed view in the country was that Parliament must resolve this themselves - that a majority do not want a referendum and would only accept one if it became absolutely obvious that Parliament cannot do the job - which is looking likely. It appears they are all afraid that if they go for that they will never get voted in again

I just checked to see if there were polls on that and according to a Sky poll 53% do want a second Referendum. Possibly more interesting only 36% do not want a second referendum. However at the same time as 52% wanting a second Ref, 51% believe it would stop people's faith in Government but they still want one!. Why they are even asking that is beyond me. Who still has faith in Government?

https://news.sky.com/story/sky-data-poll-53-of-british-public-want-second-eu-referendum-11584278

Another reason they may be afraid is the far right - they took to wearing yellow vests and blocking ambulances last week trying to show how big they could be if Brexit did not go as they want
http://anotherangryvoice.blogspot.com/2018/12/is-ambulance-blocking-most-depraved.html

and then there is the reality that from my reading the Government just does not have the ability to deal with Brexit having sold most of itself off to please neo liberalism.


https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/09654313.2018.1501469

 

All the emphasis is now on preparations for No deal and to blackmail MP's to
vote for May's deal which she is determined will be the only deal.

https://www.theguardian.com/politic...meets-to-discuss-ramping-up-plans-for-no-deal

and now they all go off for a two week holiday.

Here is a link to an ongoing live report on this.

https://www.theguardian.com/politic...than-brexiters-claims-rees-mogg-politics-live

 

Gabby Hinsliff cannot believe that Parliament would put Britain through a No Deal and believes it is just to blackmail them to say Yes to May's deal. She does however point out that it is not impossible that all this blackmail over no deal, trying to scare the EU to change it's mind. trying to scare British MP's to vote for May's deal, just might end up in a no deal. She also points out the massive amount of taxpayers money which is being wasted. but then she suggests there are alternatives

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/dec/18/managed-no-deal-brexit

 

here's the problem I have with all that, you're basing your opinion on "polls" ...polls are turning out to be notoriously inaccurate with a certain demographic, millennials ....millennials don't respond to phone calls, even fewer respond to unknown numbers, or numbers not displayed on their devices ...so how do pollsters reach them?....millennials are now the largest demographic in most countries they're the electoral decision makers when they turn out to vote....Brexit affects millenials more than the older boomer generation who favour Brexit, but that generation is literally dying off their future is over, the future belongs to the millennials who may well be horrified at a breakup of the EU and all that it offers them now that they have a clear idea of what a brexit deal looks like.

and I reject the idea there's something special about a referendum that it can only be done once...Canada has been through this twice on the same issue the last result even closer than the Brexit...the first referendum on secession revealed the importance of asking the right question on the ballot....the 2nd time a secession vote was defeated again and there's been no animosity after it's defeat....and the door is never closed on more referendums because that's the nature of democracy, situations change and so do people they can change their mind again, that's the democratic way...

vote on Brexit again, this time with the correct options and without the lies and deceit

 

You misunderstood me. If something is being asserted the only reality on which they could make it would be on Polls. The polls did not agree with what I was hearing last night but they did agree with what frightens MP's or what May is finding helpful to use as an excuse, that calling another referendum would make people lose faith in the Government. However as most people wanted a second referendum referendum anyway, I think it was just the belief that they would lose faith in the Gov that frightened them. I would suggest that that anyway is a done deal.

It was the old who got Brexit, them and the extreme rich who will benefit and those most hurt by austerity just to tell the Gov what they thought of it. Then there were some who believed leaving the EU would bring back a magic British Imperial past and yes some of them are old and some are dead and yes, now there are more young available to vote - I am assuming they are not millennial? A lot of the young did not vote at the last Referendum or it would have been No Brexit. As I have said elsewhere I would think they would have learned from that if there were another. I also agree with you that having a referendum does not rule out having another. People have information they did not have when they made their vote last time. I think one of the reasons the Government is against it is because it would have a hard time saying no to Scotland wanting another Referendum on Independence. In the main, I am in agreement with you.

 

Don't underestimate the UK's ability to blunder on blindly into a crisis. Theresa May's deal is unacceptable to parliament, parliament is unwilling to revoke article 50 and so we're left with the inevitability of a "No Deal" with all that involves

 

Don't underestimate the role of Momentum in promoting Brexit in the hope and expectation that Brexit would release the grip of the Neo-liberals and corporatists and lead to a new workers' paradise here in the UK.

The Labour Party's lack of a clear and achievable Brexit vision is as lamentable as the Conservatives'. Just insisting that you'll somehow achieve some kind of nebulous "jobs first" Brexit by somehow tempting the EU to give access to the EEA without the four freedoms is utter fantasy.

 

I think no deal is better than May's deal, or to quote Theresa May herself;
No deal is better than a bad deal.

WTO rules with the EU is fine with me.

What's not fine with me is a deal with the EU that will stop any other deals with UK and any other markets.

 

No deal with the EU should allow the UK to forge other deals around the world, and put deals like America at the head of the queue instead, fore, the EU told us we cannot negotiate any new deals when we wanted to, so, let's include the EU and not negotiate any new deals with them too.


Focusing on the EU deal is putting them at the head of the queue.
It's called Brexit.


They swore we can't have a better deal outside of the EU than inside of the EU, so, let's take that as they're only going to give us a bad deal or no deal.


The EU has too much saving face to ever give UK what it wants.

 

I hope that WTO rules won't be as disastrous as the majority of experts are predicting....

 

Why would the US offer better terms to the UK than it has to the EU ? The EU is a much larger trading bloc and wields far more economic clout.

I know President Trump has said that the UK would be at the front of the queue, but he is also insistent that any deals would very much favour the US. President Trump says a lot of things but I'm inclined to believe the latter.

 

It worked Pre EU.

 

Like minded common language.
Less fear of breaking apart if the UK gets a good deal.
If the EU give the UK a good deal, then other countries in the EU will want that too, US doesn't have this political need.

 

No it didn't, that's why we joined the EU.

The world has changed immensely since then. The kinds of supply chains that are quite routine these days were unheard of at the time.

 

Why should the EU give us a better deal than being inside of the EU?
@The Don

That's why we should have no deal, because they're determined to make Brexit an example.

 

That is what Gabby is saying as she puts here

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/dec/18/managed-no-deal-brexit

and she believes leave us with No Deal and all that entails. Of course it could. MP's are furious about being treated like this and could refuse to do what she wants just because of that. They should though have expected it as May did not even want them to have a say. Let's hope they can get their act together and act for their country rather than thinking of the next election.

 

Why would a hard-nosed businessman like President Trump allow such sentiment to influence his negotiations ?

The US has a clear "America First" policy when it comes to trade deals. I cannot see how a UK deal negotiated after that came into force will be better than the EU trade deal made ahead it coming into force.

 

The EU have a clear no better deal outside of the EU policy to save itself.
America doesn't have that.

 

Why have you misquoted me ?

I was asking why the US would give a better deal to the UK than it has to the EU.

 

Once again you seem to be answering a question I have not asked.

The UK currently operates within the trading relationship between the EU and the US. The basis for this relationship was negotiated before President Trump's "America First" trading strategy.

Bearing that in mind, why would the US offer better trading terms to the UK post-Brexit than it currently enjoys as part of the EU when the UK is a far smaller market than the EU and wields far less economic influence ?