[Discussion] Brexit means Brexit

Discuss the political fallout and other issues around Britain's exit, Brexit for short, from the EU.

For the sake of clarity, I'm including the full text of Article 50.

Article 50 wrote:

1. Any Member State may decide to withdraw from the Union in accordance with its own constitutional requirements.

2. A Member State which decides to withdraw shall notify the European Council of its intention. In the light of the guidelines provided by the European Council, the Union shall negotiate and conclude an agreement with that State, setting out the arrangements for its withdrawal, taking account of the framework for its future relationship with the Union. That agreement shall be negotiated in accordance with Article 218(3) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union. It shall be concluded on behalf of the Union by the Council, acting by a qualified majority, after obtaining the consent of the European Parliament.

3. 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.

4. For the purposes of paragraphs 2 and 3, the member of the European Council or of the Council representing the withdrawing Member State shall not participate in the discussions of the European Council or Council or in decisions concerning it.

A qualified majority shall be defined in accordance with Article 238(3)(b) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union.

5. If a State which has withdrawn from the Union asks to rejoin, its request shall be subject to the procedure referred to in Article 49.

I like how in the first video Guernsey, Jersey, and the smaller islands are now EU territory outside "the wall".

It's only metaphorical.

So, May headed to Strasbourg this evening to try and get a deal before the vote tomorrow. She has claimed she has gotten "legally binding" changes to the withdrawal deal. What she got was legally binding assurances that use vague enough language, ironically not entirely dissimilar to the Good Friday Agreement, in order to allow people project their own political outlook into them.

Nothing substantive has changed. May is now going to claim victory and bounce the Commons into a vote tomorrow. Some might see this as the ladder they can use to climb down and others might just buy it. Even the European Research Group are making very sanguine noises. They will probably still oppose but it sounds like the EU27 are giving May enough cover to get the deal over the line.

The UK is leaving the EU. I mean they'll still be subject to all it's regulations with no influence over them and none of the benefits but leaving the institutions all the same. I think we are seeing history folks.

Of course the usual Brexit disclaimer applies i.e. this could be completely wrong and expect nothing rational to happen.

If I were a betting man, I would be betting Parliament reject it again. May has no majority. The ERG don't want it and it only takes 3 of them to decide to "stand on principal" to kill it. Corbyn has told his MPs to vote No. I am not sure the DUP realise that having Northern Ireland be a special economic zone of the UK is less likely to lead to a United Ireland than No Deal Brexit.

Edit: Odds from Paddy Power. 3/1 it passes. 1/5 it doesn't. So that the bookies have it somewhere around a 20% chance of passing.

I can’t see it passing either. There will be an extension and another referendum vote I think. I wouldn’t be surprised if May is gone by the end of the week.

Yeah Jeffery Cox has completely torpedo’d any chance of her new deal getting approved. He’s said her ‘legally binding’ changes don’t change the backstop at all.

It’ll be a second referendum now. I don’t see any other choice left. Parliament will not allow a no-deal situation.

Sorbicol wrote:

It’ll be a second referendum now. I don’t see any other choice left. Parliament will not allow a no-deal situation.

I don't see how the bill hold another ref gets passed in a parliament where the ERG are hostile to it.

DanB wrote:

I don't see how the bill hold another ref gets passed in a parliament where the ERG are hostile to it.

Because the majority of Tories aren’t in the ERG, and despite everything they would prefer to remain rather than be left with a no deal. It’s not a given I admit but we are now into the ‘historical political legacy’ realms of things. When historians look at the causes and fallout of the current political crisis (and it is a crisis now) a 100 years hence, they’ll all want to be on the right side of history. The ERG are going to be the patsies in all of this in the end. It would also be May’s last f**k you to them as well - she’s got nothing else left.

Alternatively of course I’m completely wrong and it’ll be a default no deal. It’s definitely one or the other now.

As we get closer and closer I also think that No Deal is the most likely scenario. It's a really bad outcome, but it also seems to be the action that takes the least spine/assumption of risk/initiative on almost every single individual lawmaker. Nobody (or rather, no critical mass of people) seems to be able to muster the courage to come forward to stop this.

A second Referendum is also a way for them to evade responsibility, but it still requires actual action to set it up. For some ineffable reason I feel like that's less likely.

Sorbicol wrote:

It’ll be a second referendum now. I don’t see any other choice left. Parliament will not allow a no-deal situation.

How does that work though - isn't the UK out at the end of the month? Can a second referendum be rushed through before then? And then acted upon? Seems awfully quick for an outfit that can't organize a piss-up in a brewery.

There seems to be an implicit understanding that the EU will allow an extension to the UK's exit date in order to allow for major political events that may affect the outcome of Brexit, like a general election or second referendum.

If not, the UK can always unilaterally withdraw Article 50, hold a referendum, then reassert Article 50 if necessary. They don't actually need the EU to grant an extension.

Looks like 80% hard brexit, 10% May deal, 10% referendum to me. But I guess they will start with an extension no matter what?

The other option is that May calls another GE tomorrow. The drawback if she does that though is she’ll probably have to rescind article 50. Right now, with TIG taking votes mostly from labour, she might just think it’s worth the risk.

May's deal was rejected.

IMAGE(https://media.giphy.com/media/uH27sheFg9One/giphy.gif)

Free vote tomorrow on no deal Brexit. That’ll be fun.

Looks like going into 2020 the theme for the US and Britain is going to be "I hate foreigners so much I'm willing to blow up my own country to keep them out!"

Why did she even bother? Why the whole show yesterday? Surely her whips knew the result regardless of her efforts. I'll never understand this UK government. They are not even applying basic rationality at this point.

Axon wrote:

I'll never understand this UK government. They are not even applying basic rationality at this point.

I've always felt this profile of her gets to the heart of it
https://www.lrb.co.uk/v39/n06/david-...

She takes a position and then she sticks to it, seeing it as a matter of principle that she delivers on what she has committed to. This doesn’t mean that she is a conviction politician. Often she arrives at a position reluctantly after much agonising – as home secretary she became notorious for being painfully slow to decide on matters over which she had personal authority. Many of the positions she adopts are ones she has inherited, seeing no option but to make good on other people’s promises. This has frequently brought her into conflict with the politicians from whom she inherited these commitments. By making fixed what her colleagues regarded as lines in the sand, she drove some of them mad.

I think her behaviour is a combination of the above and a fervent desire, as Prime Minister, to leave behind the legacy of being "the PM who delivered brexit". I'm glad her deal has failed in parliament, her bungling of this entire project is reason enough that she should go down in history as a PM who has no legacy

Seriosuly, f*ck the lot of them. What is the No-voters' plan? Force a no-deal and then go negotiate trade deals with other countries, having reneged on our responsibilities to the EU, shown that our government can't govern and generally put ourselves in a really weak position?

Hmm, although the polls seem to be swinging in favour of remain, perhaps forcing a second referendum really is a good strategy for remainers?

https://whatukthinks.org/eu/question...

Zelos wrote:

What is the No-voters' plan?

1: Show Johnny Foreigner who's boss.
2: ???
3: PROFIT!!!

I wonder how all of the citizens that caused this mess in the first place by voting to leave the EU, and then recognized that they had been sold a false bill of goods, feel now?

Probably not a whole lot of them around.

Zelos wrote:

Seriosuly, f*ck the lot of them. What is the No-voters' plan? Force a no-deal and then go negotiate trade deals with other countries, having reneged on our responsibilities to the EU, shown that our government can't govern and generally put ourselves in a really weak position?

Hmm, although the polls seem to be swinging in favour of remain, perhaps forcing a second referendum really is a good strategy for remainers?

https://whatukthinks.org/eu/question...

After Corbyn failed to get his VoNC through, it was really the only option left for remainers. It's finally broken down to a choice of "No deal or referendum" - i.e. about as high stakes as it can get. Still loaded towards no deal mind (We might all vote for it in a second referendum) but at least there is a chance for common sense to take hold. We'll see.

JC wrote:

I wonder how all of the citizens that caused this mess in the first place by voting to leave the EU, and then recognized that they had been sold a false bill of goods, feel now?

Those that have changed their minds have now changed their minds. The rest of them will be screaming blue murder that "BREXIT HAS BEEN STOLEN FROM US!".

There is going to be a hell of a lot of reckoning to come out of all of this yet. It's not going to be pretty and our current crop of politicians are simply not up to the job.

Jonman wrote:
Zelos wrote:

What is the No-voters' plan?

1: Show Johnny Foreigner who's boss.
2: ???
3: PROFIT!!!

Don't you mean Johann Foreigner?

BadKen wrote:
Jonman wrote:
Zelos wrote:

What is the No-voters' plan?

1: Show Johnny Foreigner who's boss.
2: ???
3: PROFIT!!!

Don't you mean Johann Foreigner?

I think he meant Mohammad bin Foreigner. I don't recall many people upset about those moving to the UK from Sweden.

Shadout wrote:

Looks like 80% hard brexit, 10% May deal, 10% referendum to me. But I guess they will start with an extension no matter what?

Not quite. Last night May's proposal got 38% approval. There is a vote today and no deal will be rejected. Vote tomorrow on requesting a delay and that will be passed.

The consensus seems to be for some kind of a deal. Moving to a softer Brexit to win Labour votes loses Tory votes but I would guess not in the same proportion. Reaching a commons consensus in this way will still feel like a stitch up to a lot of people who voted out but, whatever happens now, a lot of people will be upset.

As much as I dislike May she might have got the balance point right. Die hard Brexiteers should have voted for May's deal to ensure there is a Brexit. Brexit in Name Only Labour MPs should have voted for it because out was decided in a referendum and it does a lot of what Labour wants anyway.

It seems bizarre that so many people have hung their decision affecting a huge range of economic and social issues of once in a lifetime importance on one thing: the backstop.

yregprincess wrote:
Shadout wrote:

Looks like 80% hard brexit, 10% May deal, 10% referendum to me. But I guess they will start with an extension no matter what?

The consensus seems to be for some kind of a deal.

Sure, but if the only thing they can agree on is that they want a deal, but not on what to do about it, then what else can really happen.

Yeah, I don't think that they will vote for a No Deal Brexit. I think that they will fail to take actions required to stop No-Deal Brexit from occurring.

Shadout wrote:
yregprincess wrote:
Shadout wrote:

Looks like 80% hard brexit, 10% May deal, 10% referendum to me. But I guess they will start with an extension no matter what?

The consensus seems to be for some kind of a deal.

Sure, but if the only thing they can agree on is that they want a deal, but not on what to do about it, then what else can really happen.

If you mean they will have to delay then absolutely. What then: the government does not want an election, the government does not want another referendum, they could request an extension on the understanding they will build consensus for something that will pass in parliament. EU couldn't say no to that and the government has time to find just enough votes to get something passed. After a refusal by the commons to a no-deal, what other choice is there?

Yonder wrote:

Yeah, I don't think that they will vote for a No Deal Brexit. I think that they will fail to take actions required to stop No-Deal Brexit from occurring.

I think the delay will happen and getting a deal through the commons in whatever time that allows feels like the most likely option but far from definite especially considering how intransigent Labour is being, I fear, for their own ends.