• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Brexit | OT3 | A Feast for Crows

oilvomer

Member
I am getting more and more of the opinion there is no negotiation to be done here, either we accept the EU are not going to cave and deal with the fall out from the Daily Mail or walk away and deal with the fall out.... (economy crashes)

Honestly it is so fucking simple, either give the EU what they want, or walk away, how many times do our dip shit politicians need to be told the same line over and over.

Show them the fucking money!
 

Uzzy

Member
I am getting more and more of the opinion there is no negotiation to be done here, either we accept the EU are not going to cave and deal with the fall out from the Daily Mail or walk away and deal with the fall out.... (economy crashes)

Honestly it is so fucking simple, either give the EU what they want, or walk away, how many times do our dip shit politicians need to be told the same line over and over.

Show them the fucking money!

While that would have been a smart thing to do right from the beginning, things have changed since then. May's lost all authority, and I can't imagine Brussels trusts that she has the ability to get any deal through Parliament anymore. If she showed them the money, then the hard Brexit wing of the Tory Party would go nuclear in very quick time and try to replace her. Such a deal might actually get through Parliament, but May would have to break the Tory Party apart to do it, and I don't think she's going to pull a Peel.

On the other hand, any acts that might bolster her authority, like sacking Boris, would also see her getting replaced, probably by Boris himself.
 

Joni

Member
Syriza also constantly tried to get deals that just weren’t available and had to take their country literally to the cliffs edge to come to a sensible agreement that was actually possible.

Which was coincidentally just about the deal that the European Union wanted to offer.
 

Uzzy

Member
Magic Money Tree strikes again.

Theresa May has decided to commit billions of pounds on preparing Britain to leave the European Union without a deal in a bid to save her premiership.

The spending, which will be “unlocked” in the new year if no progress is made with Brussels, is intended to send a signal to pro-Brexit MPs that she is serious about regaining the upper hand in the negotiations.

It came as rebel MPs gave Mrs May until Christmas to make real progress on Brexit to avoid another attempt to oust her.

The Telegraph can disclose that Philip Hammond, the Chancellor, is planning to sanction the Brexit spending in the new year to prepare the UK for leaving in March 2019 without a deal with the EU.

The cash – which is not expected to appear in the Budget – will be spent on new technology to speed up customs checks at the borders if the UK has to revert to a World Trade Organisation tariff system, and a range of other measures.

The Government is already working on plans to deal with air traffic control and migration in the event of a “hard Brexit”. Face to face talks begin again with EU officials in Brussels on Monday.

One senior Treasury source told the Telegraph: “Billions of pounds will be unlocked in the new year if progress has not been made. We have to plan for a no deal.”

So, they're finally preparing for a no deal scenario. Way too late, and it's only happening to stop Tory rebels, but at least there's some preparation right? Now they just need to deliver on an entirely new IT system to deal with a mammoth increase in customs checks in just over a years time. Easy.
 

pswii60

Member
Magic Money Tree strikes again.



So, they're finally preparing for a no deal scenario. Way too late, and it's only happening to stop Tory rebels, but at least there's some preparation right? Now they just need to deliver on an entirely new IT system to deal with a mammoth increase in customs checks in just over a years time. Easy.
I wonder if their "plan" is still to make the UK (well, England) in to a tax haven to try and stop businesses moving away following no deal. Which is flawed on so many levels, not least because it will never work when businesses know that will be instantly reversed the moment Corbyn gets in. And if Brexit voters thought public services were stretched now, then..
 
I wonder if their "plan" is still to make the UK (well, England) in to a tax haven to try and stop businesses moving away following no deal. Which is flawed on so many levels, not least because it will never work when businesses know that will be instantly reversed the moment Corbyn gets in. And if Brexit voters thought public services were stretched now, then..

It's funny because the only excuse brexiteers had for wanting to leave apart from immigration was the "I'm tired of politicians only working for the rich and corporations".

Meanwhile Mays government is making contingencies to literally bow down to the rich and corporations just to keep the economy from failing.

Why are people stupid?
 

Ac30

Member
Magic Money Tree strikes again.



So, they're finally preparing for a no deal scenario. Way too late, and it's only happening to stop Tory rebels, but at least there's some preparation right? Now they just need to deliver on an entirely new IT system to deal with a mammoth increase in customs checks in just over a years time. Easy.

Welp, that probably makes my decision for me. I'm assuming this means no protections for EU residents.
 

Lagamorph

Member
Theresa May under pressure over ‘secret advice’ on halting Brexit

Theresa May is under pressure to publish secret legal advice that is believed to state that parliament could still stop Brexit before the end of March 2019 if MPs judge that a change of mind is in the national interest. The move comes as concern grows that exit talks with Brussels are heading for disaster.

The calls for the prime minister to reveal advice from the country’s top legal experts follow government statements declaring that Brexit is now unstoppable, and that MPs will have to choose between whatever deal is on offer next year – even if it is a bad one – or no deal at all.
The prominent lawyer Jessica Simor QC, from Matrix chambers, has written to May asking her to release the legal advice under the Freedom of Information Act. Simor says she has been told by “two good sources” that the prime minister has been advised “that the article 50 notification can be withdrawn by the UK at any time before 29 March 2019 resulting in the UK remaining in the EU on its current favourable terms.
 

PJV3

Member
It is unlikely that it would be able to keep all those advantages it had.

I don't know, there doesn't seem to be any mechanism for the rest of the EU to do that, it's going to go to the courts probably.

Unless something has changed since I last heard, all sides are using the vagueness to push their arguments.
 

Mivey

Member
The Brexit negotiations remind me more and more of the Syriza - EU negotiations.

Syriza also constantly tried to get deals that just weren't available and had to take their country literally to the cliffs edge to come to a sensible agreement that was actually possible.
Except that the EU plans for Greece are complete bollocks, which was the reason that the IMF essentially wanted out. Of course it was only ever going to end up the way they wanted, since the only options for the Greek government is to go bankrupt or do exactly as they are told.
With the Brexit negotiations, the EU actually has common sense on their side. On the other hand, the current UK government would likely take the nuclear option instead of having to reach a compromise. (For all the the shit people give Syriza, they ended up doing what they thought was the only common sense choice at the end)
 
Not even fictional Harold Saxon fucked up the Prime Minister position as bad as May has. She’s desperate to hold on because without Brexit her premiership will be nothing but a seat warmer for the next PM.
 
The Brexit negotiations remind me more and more of the Syriza - EU negotiations.

Syriza also constantly tried to get deals that just weren’t available and had to take their country literally to the cliffs edge to come to a sensible agreement that was actually possible.

He got a worse deal though, because he forgot that any Greece plans also must take account that it must go through all Euro countries.
A mistake the UK is still doing which treats Brexit like a domestic problem.
 

oilvomer

Member
I think you guys are being unfairly harsh on May here.... it is about bloody time we prepped for worst case scenario, a competent Gov would of done this day one....

I presume the money will come from not having to pay a divorce bill

Mp's will never vote to stop article 50 as many of them reside in leave voting areas, and their own interest will be at the fore front of their minds here
 
This, in an ideal world, would be the start of changing the publics opinion enough for calls to cancel brexit.

We have already started the media blitz for everything going wrong with brexit so now start focusing on hidden documents that shows we do have an out and how the selfish, party over country Tories are screwing the country over.

With the Tories being a complete embarrassment and making no progress it will be easier to say 'we aren't going to be able to leave on good terms, we will be fucked, we need to cancel brexit now we all know how terrible it will be'.
 

PJV3

Member
Except that the EU plans for Greece are complete bollocks, which was the reason that the IMF essentially wanted out. Of course it was only ever going to end up the way they wanted, since the only options for the Greek government is to go bankrupt or do exactly as they are told.
With the Brexit negotiations, the EU actually has common sense on their side. On the other hand, the current UK government would likely take the nuclear option instead of having to reach a compromise. (For all the the shit people give Syriza, they ended up doing what they thought was the only common sense choice at the end)

Wasn't it more about politics at a national level than the EU(I agree it made things pointlessly harder for Greece) governments pushing austerity on their own people just weren't interested in helping them out.
 

Xando

Member
Except that the EU plans for Greece are complete bollocks, which was the reason that the IMF essentially wanted out. Of course it was only ever going to end up the way they wanted, since the only options for the Greek government is to go bankrupt or do exactly as they are told.
With the Brexit negotiations, the EU actually has common sense on their side. On the other hand, the current UK government would likely take the nuclear option instead of having to reach a compromise. (For all the the shit people give Syriza, they ended up doing what they thought was the only common sense choice at the end)
The first deal the EU offered was much better than what Greece got because they pointlessly demanded a debt cut which just wasn't realistic at the time. Not only did they get a worse deal but also played their little game until greece was literally about to the default.

What i'm saying is that May is playing a similiar game where all goodwill on the EU is largely used by now and the well is already very poisened.
Both Syriza and the Tory party played (or incase of the Torys are still playing) for a domestic audience without acknowledging political realities in other countries.

He got a worse deal though, because he forgot that any Greece plans also must take account that it must go through all Euro countries.
A mistake the UK is still doing which treats Brexit like a domestic problem.

Precisly what i'm saying.
 

Joni

Member
I don't know, there doesn't seem to be any mechanism for the rest of the EU to do that, it's going to go to the courts probably.

Unless something has changed since I last heard, all sides are using the vagueness to push their arguments.

It might be too vague in general, but the article has a clear end date. There is nothing on withdrawing the article, only the initial announcement.

The Treaties shall cease to apply to the State in question from the date of entry into force of the withdrawal agreement or, failing that, two years after the notification referred to in paragraph 2, unless the European Council, in agreement with the Member State concerned, unanimously decides to extend this period.

The European Commission has also asked to include a firm statement confirming this into the Brexit negotiations.

Except that the EU plans for Greece are complete bollocks, which was the reason that the IMF essentially wanted out.

It is easy to blame the European Union when all the debts for which Greece needed that settlement were to the International Monetary Fund. It wanted the European Union to drop all Greek debts so it could be repaid. That it is also why it didn't want to be part of the plans, they would have needed to wait for their repayments.
 

PJV3

Member
It might be too vague in general, but the article has a clear end date. There is nothing on withdrawing the article, only the initial announcement.

The European Commission has also asked to include a firm statement confirming this into the Brexit negotiations

I was thinking more about the current perks and opt outs we have, we haven't broken any rules and it's going to come down to whatever "constitutional requirements" end up being.

The price will be Britain's reputation and becoming a bit of a joke, voting to leave with absolutely no plan whatsoever, and the worst government in decades.
 

theaface

Member
I think you guys are being unfairly harsh on May here.... it is about bloody time we prepped for worst case scenario, a competent Gov would of done this day one....

Is this sarcasm? How can the two bolded points co-exist in the same paragraph? May has been PM for a fair chunk of time now, she is the head of this current government and is therefore completely accountable for its actions. Not to mention that she was the one who triggered A50 without a semblance of a plan, causing the 2 year clock to start ticking towards an economic shitshow.

Throw in her entire tenure in the home office, her 'citizens of nowhere' drivel, snoopers charter and everything else she's pretty much said or stood for as a frontline MP and the conclusion should be that people aren't nearly harsh enough on May.
 

Tacitus_

Member
I don't know, there doesn't seem to be any mechanism for the rest of the EU to do that, it's going to go to the courts probably.

Unless something has changed since I last heard, all sides are using the vagueness to push their arguments.

Mechanism or no, there will be pressure for UK to have consequences for this circus.
 

Mivey

Member
It is easy to blame the European Union when all the debts for which Greece needed that settlement were to the International Monetary Fund. It wanted the European Union to drop all Greek debts so it could be repaid. That it is also why it didn't want to be part of the plans, they would have needed to wait for their repayments.
It was the EU (and I think actually a request from Germany, not sure) that brought the IMF in. A lot of voices within the IMF never wanted to be part of the original deal, let alone the various extensions, but Lagarde pushed it through. Now the IMF is just trying to get out of this insane arrangement. There just are certain kinds of debts you cannot pay back, this holds for individuals, for companies, and yes, for countries as well. Sure, this ideally should never happen, I also hope my car never breaks down, but that doesn't mean I don't get insurance for the case it does.

I feel it's also strange to blame the communist Syriza, that was specifically elected on this issue, to even dare fight back. That's such a anti-democratic view point. Certainly the ability of a people to shape their own lives matters more than money?

Admittedly, one of the prior Greek governments should have pulled the break on this and just accepted all out bankruptcy. At this point, I feel, they are just completely stuck in this giant Sunk Cost Fallacy, that is the Greek rescue plan. Let's hope the country is in some decent shape in a few decades, and most importantly, as part of EU reforms, there is some ordered way for a Euro country to declare bankruptcy.
 
Well, screaming for democracy is sure easy if it isn't your money. But I guess allowing the people in all the other people to decide if they want to spend billions of money on Greece is then not that important I guess.
 
I think you guys are being unfairly harsh on May here.... it is about bloody time we prepped for worst case scenario, a competent Gov would of done this day one....

I presume the money will come from not having to pay a divorce bill

Mp's will never vote to stop article 50 as many of them reside in leave voting areas, and their own interest will be at the fore front of their minds here

I assume you are talking about the minimum £20bn that May has already conceded to paying. Not sure how the UK could get away with not paying anything back to the EU. It would not bode well for future trade agreements if the UK was seen to be happy to renege on deals.

A competent government would have spent time discussing the various options, studying the benefits and costs to each and then decide whether to trigger Article 50.
 

Joni

Member
It was the EU (and I think actually a request from Germany, not sure) that brought the IMF in. A lot of voices within the IMF never wanted to be part of the original deal, let alone the various extensions, but Lagarde pushed it through.

It was simply Dominique Strauss-Kahn who assumed it was worth it instead of risking another Lehman's scenario for the banks holding the greek debt.

Now the IMF is just trying to get out of this insane arrangement.

They have actually gone back to paying out new loans.

I feel it's also strange to blame the communist Syriza, that was specifically elected on this issue, to even dare fight back. That's such a anti-democratic view point. Certainly the ability of a people to shape their own lives matters more than money?

The party is being blamed because it was plainly lying to the population.

Admittedly, one of the prior Greek governments should have pulled the break on this and just accepted all out bankruptcy. At this point, I feel, they are just completely stuck in this giant Sunk Cost Fallacy, that is the Greek rescue plan. Let's hope the country is in some decent shape in a few decades, and most importantly, as part of EU reforms, there is some ordered way for a Euro country to declare bankruptcy.

It is more likely European leaders are quietly turning the loan into an indefinite one that can be forgotten when everyone stopped paying attention.
 

Xando

Member
Britain’s ruling Conservatives barred two of their own lawmakers in the European Parliament after they broke the party whip and voted for a motion demanding London do more to meet EU demands in Brexit talks.

“Julie Girling and ... Richard Ashworth were suspended from the Conservative Party last night after supporting a resolution ... to block Brexit talks moving forward,” the party said on Sunday in a statement that highlighted divisions over Britain’s move to quit the European Union in 18 months.

Prime Minister Theresa May supported the move. A government source said the two had behaved “totally irresponsibly”.

“They left the party no choice but to act,” Ashley Fox, leader of the 20-strong group, said in the statement, describing the decision of Ashworth and Girling, a former group leader and chief whip respectively, as “extremely regrettable”.

Girling, who like Ashworth and Fox opposed Brexit during last year’s referendum, defended her decision to vote with the overwhelming majority in Strasbourg on Tuesday on a non-binding resolution which urged EU leaders not to accept London’s request for talks on post-Brexit trade without further concessions.

“I did not vote to prevent trade talks,” she said, noting she called for such negotiations. However, she said in a statement that it was “patently obvious” that the EU’s test of “sufficient progress” on key divorce issues were not yet met.

Her vote, she said, put the interests of her constituents over party discipline and referred to support on the far-right for Britain to walk out without a deal: “I have never agreed to silently acquiesce as our country heads towards a cliff edge,” she said, describing that as “wanton economic self-harm”.

http://www.reuters.com/article/uk-b...o-eu-lawmakers-over-brexit-vote-idUKKBN1CD0E4
 

oilvomer

Member
Is this sarcasm? How can the two bolded points co-exist in the same paragraph? May has been PM for a fair chunk of time now, she is the head of this current government and is therefore completely accountable for its actions. Not to mention that she was the one who triggered A50 without a semblance of a plan, causing the 2 year clock to start ticking towards an economic shitshow.

Throw in her entire tenure in the home office, her 'citizens of nowhere' drivel, snoopers charter and everything else she's pretty much said or stood for as a frontline MP and the conclusion should be that people aren't nearly harsh enough on May.

It was meant solely in this singular context, I did not make that clear, as in finally the penny drops and provisions are now being made, so 'at last' (weak applause) for starting to prepare for the worst, criticisms for not acting until now though are more than warranted
 

theaface

Member

ittoryu

Member
It was meant solely in this singular context, I did not make that clear, as in finally the penny drops and provisions are now being made, so 'at last' (weak applause) for starting to prepare for the worst, criticisms for not acting until now though are more than warranted
And where is this cash coming from?
 

chadskin

Member
DLpUNEVW4AMr4OO.jpg
boldstrategycotton.jpg
 

liquidtmd

Banned
EU Leaders: "We know. It's a nice ball"

May: "Can we have the ball back now"?

EU Leaders: "We think not"

We are so fucking screwed
 

Uzzy

Member
I see we're at the 'repeat what we said earlier, but slower' phase of diplomacy.

It'll be red meat to the base I suppose, the EU will say no and she'll get to blame them for no deal.
 

Heartfyre

Member
I know May is allergic to clear statements, but I'm confused how she could make an argument that the ball is in the EU's court when, insofar as is publically known, the EU is still waiting on firm policy details from the Florence speech. We're not talking about hearing "We will pay our commitments" from a speech, but hard figures and data in a written format that can be analysed.
 
Top Bottom