Brexit deal

[Boomstick]

I'll repeat .
The question was remain or leave
NOT remain or deal.

If parliament can't agree on a deal, then we leave without one .
It's that simple

[Glyn_Wigley]

I'll repeat .
The question was remain or leave
NOT remain or deal.

If parliament can't agree on a deal, then we leave without one .
It's that simple

And when we do leave without a deal, what problems do you think there'll be that will have to be tackled?

[The Red Baron]

I'll repeat .
The question was remain or leave
NOT remain or deal.

If parliament can't agree on a deal, then we leave without one .
It's that simple

Hi 🙋 Theresa! Thank you for popping in! 😃

[ravenrover]

I'll repeat .
The question was remain or leave
NOT remain or deal.

If parliament can't agree on a deal, then we leave without one .
It's that simple

Was there a timescale set on the ballot paper? don't believe there was.

[BillyStubbsTears]

BS

Just for the record then. That video I posted earlier, of Rees-Mogg having a go at Mark Carney for pointing out the horrific economic consequences of No Deal, and saying that wasn't acceptable because it didn't take into account the deal that we would get.

You DO accept that Rees-Mogg was bullshitting you there? (Because he's now one of the biggest advocates of us leaving with No Deal.)

You DO accept that the complaints about Project Fear being a scare tactic that didn't take into account the deal we'd get were so much piss and wind? (Because he wasn't questioning the validity of the predictions of the effect of No Deal - he was saying that we WOULDN'T leave with No Deal.)

You DO accept the accuracy of the professional economists' predictions of what an economic hit we are running into if we leave with out a deal? (Because there's not a single serious economist who says it will be anything less than the biggest hit to our economy since the Great Depression.)

Or if you don't accept those things, you've got a well thought out reason why not?

[Mr1Croft]

As soon as May delayed the first vote in December, I put a bet on the UK to leave on 29th March with no deal at 10/1. My cash out has remained at less than my stake for the last few weeks. However following May's statement today my cash out is now twice that of my stake.

Don't know whether the betting market gives us anyore indication or insight, but I would have expected today's statement to reaffirm that not only will No Deal be amended off the table, it's highly unlikely the UK will leave on 29th March.

I think I better quit whilst I'm ahead...

[Filo]

I think todays statement just confirms that the PM intends to plough on regardless, all the cross party talks and listening to MP’s is just lip service, she is pandering to Rees-Mogg, Johnson etc. and the DUP, IT’s shameless Politics at it’s very best. Theres even the threat of the Armed forces on our streets, they must be shit scared of civil disorder

[Donnywolf]

She must have listened to somebody as she seemed to have ditched " We will make sure we deliver on the will of the British people"

It seemed to have been replaced with something ekse that appeared in almost EVERY answer " we must establish what there is a majority for across the House" (or that is a paraphrase anyway) AND "which will respect the Referendum result" which is like she has said a million times already but slightly differently put

Prepare to listen to both again ! 

[Filo]

"So Baldrick, what's Cunning Plan B?"

"It's the same as Plan A, sir.  But I have a Plan C."

"Enlighten me, Baldrick."

"Well, it's the same as Plan B, but with a different name."


😂😂😂😂😂😂😂

[IDM]

I'll repeat .
The question was remain or leave
NOT remain or deal.

If parliament can't agree on a deal, then we leave without one .
It's that simple

Why when I read that argument am o reminded of a child with fingers in his or her ears, or an ostrich with its head in the sand.??

I get that people may have voted leave on the principle that they believe the UK should not be administered from Brussels, but there has to be an acceptance of all the consequences of leaving.??

If it was that simple, why take so long to present a brexit bill to parliament.??

If it was that simple, why is it still a complete clusterf**k over two and a half years after the referendum.?

[big fat yorkshire pudding]

Let's not forget none of us know what secret unpublished deals with all stakeholders are agreed. Other parties, mps, government and eu all may have a vested interest in it being last minute.  The eu certainly have form for it.

[Boomstick]

It's not an argument, it's just the way it is.
If parliament can't agree on a deal, then we leave without one. It's the default position we are in. 

The current shit show is just parliament trying to agree on a deal.

It's deal or no deal,
It isn't deal, 2nd referendum, or remain

[drfchound]

Can someone explain why quite a big number of our MP’s are happy for us to leave with no deal it it is going to be so catastrophic.
BST says, it WILL be a disaster if it happens according to some experts but there appears to be other people who say it won’t be.
How do we know who to believe and if it is to be a disaster for the Nation why are some MP’s happy for us to leave like that.

[Donnywolf]

Saving Filo a job .... just seen this on Twitter

"So Baldrick, what's Cunning Plan B?"

"It's the same as Plan A, sir. But I have a Plan C."

"Enlighten me, Baldrick."

"Well, it's the same as Plan B, but with a different name."

[IDM]

It's not an argument, it's just the way it is.
If parliament can't agree on a deal, then we leave without one. It's the default position we are in. 

The current shit show is just parliament trying to agree on a deal.

It's deal or no deal,
It isn't deal, 2nd referendum, or remain

So if the deal parliament eventually agrees is not what leave wanted, it’s not democratic to potentially change our minds with another vote.??

[BillyStubbsTears]

Can someone explain why quite a big number of our MP’s are happy for us to leave with no deal it it is going to be so catastrophic.
BST says, it WILL be a disaster if it happens according to some experts but there appears to be other people who say it won’t be.
How do we know who to believe and if it is to be a disaster for the Nation why are some MP’s happy for us to leave like that.

Hound.

Two points:

1) You have to ask yourself who these other people are who are contradicting trade experts and saying No Deal will be OK. I haven't seen ANY respected economics expert say it will be OK. Prof. Patrick Minford has, but he is so far out of the mainstream he's almost off the horizon. And even HE has said that, to be OK, we would have to unilaterally have zero tariffs on every import, which, he admits, would lead to the collapse of what is left of our manufacturing industry and "the managed decline of our Northern cities."

2) There aren't a lot of MPs saying ND will be OK. There are a few dozen VERY loud ones. And here, you've got to ask what their motive is. A slack handful are such devoted Europhobes that they would take whatever the consequence of ND would be, just to get out. But the rest are playing a political game for the future heart of the Tory party. The Tory membership is deeply Europhobic. And it is the Tory membership who will choose the next leader. The ND MPs are jockeying for position. Most of them aren't so f**king stupid as to actually want ND. But they want to be able to go into the next leadership process saying to their members "WE wanted ND and it is the other wing of the party that betrayed you."

I've said time after time. Those of you who voted Leave have unwittingly been used as pawns in the REAL game. Brexit was always about who rules the Tory party. The rest of us are just copping the collateral damage in the Civil War.

[wilts rover]

Can someone explain why quite a big number of our MP’s are happy for us to leave with no deal it it is going to be so catastrophic.
BST says, it WILL be a disaster if it happens according to some experts but there appears to be other people who say it won’t be.
How do we know who to believe and if it is to be a disaster for the Nation why are some MP’s happy for us to leave like that.

It's not what MP's have said hound - it's what the government's own No Deal Notices have said. Along with the freight industry, motor industry, farmers, port operators, airlines etc.

If you are concerned about those industries, the people who work in them and ordinary working people and pensioners on a low income who depend on them, then you will probably be worried.

If you are connected with international finance, hedge funds, overseas importers, see an opportunity to undercut wages and regulations or are just a very wealthy indvidual on a high salary then it wont affect you to much.

Hope that helps.

[wilts rover]

Reports tonight that Labour have tabled an amendment tonight to May's deal which asks the HoC to rule out No Deal and also to consider 2 alternatives to it:

- the CU, strong SM relationship (that has been their position to now)
- a People's Vote on a deal (either this deal or May's deal)

https://labour.org.uk/press/labour-tables-amendment-break-brexit-deadlock/

This is I believe the first time Labour's front bench have come out in favour of a PV. As an official opposition motion it will almost certainly be debated next Tuesday.

[drfchound]

You see, I said that you don’t know who to believe.
Now BST says it is a few dozen Tory MPs who are saying it and Wilts is saying it isn’t what the MPs have said.

Two forum experts telling me different things.

As for my personal circumstances, I am retired but my son isn’t and I worry for him (and my pension fund).

[Mr1Croft]

Can someone explain why quite a big number of our MP’s are happy for us to leave with no deal it it is going to be so catastrophic.
BST says, it WILL be a disaster if it happens according to some experts but there appears to be other people who say it won’t be.
How do we know who to believe and if it is to be a disaster for the Nation why are some MP’s happy for us to leave like that.

I don't consider myself to be an expert but this is just my take on it, I'm sure there are more well informed members of the forum that may take issue here:

Whilst trading on WTO rules may sound like a free and easy ride, it does mean that tarrifs on exports/imports would have to apply where a free trade agreement doesn't exist. What this means for us as consumers is that there would likely be a sudden increase on the costs of some goods we buy as the importing company may have had to pay more to import so the exporting company can cover the tarrif and this would likely be passed to the consumer.

Then there is the issue of manufacturing, for example car parts that cross the EU-UK border would need to be taxed at 10% which is the current EU tarrif, if the car is then built in the UK it would either be more expensive for the customer, or would be more expensive to export to other countries.

When you consider that in 2017 44% of our exports were to the EU and 53% of our imports were from the EU you can imagine how even a 2-4% tariff average could make everything so much more expensive.

The UK would obviously have to set its own schedule for tarrif and limits on WTO rules, we could theoretically set lower or no tariffs to encourage free trade and try to sweeten other nations to sign a free trade deal. It could also be used to lower the need for a hard border in Ireland. However WTO rules means you cannot just lower your tariffs for one nation, if you offer low or zero tariffs to one WTO member you have to offer them to all. This puts UK manufacturing and producing industries at risk from cheap imports driving out their need.

Then there is the non-tariff checks, being part of the EU means we are part of a body that ensures there is already a system in place for checking goods imported meet a mutually recognised standard. The WTO doesn't have anything in its rules about such recognised standards but without them we run the risk of chlorinated chicken from the US soon finding itself on our shelves.

Similarly goods we export to bodies like the EU would be rejected if they require certain certification or they change their goalposts.

Then there is the message a No Deal Brexit sends. Yes we want to negotiate Free Trade Agreements all over the globe, but a Free Trade Agreement is essentially an agreement between two nation states following a negotiating. If we can't negotiate a deal with our closest and largest trading partners for the last half century, how do we expect any other nation to take us seriously or form a queue to sort out trade deals.

That is just the issues on trade and WTO rules, you could point to the Irish border and put forth a million other reasons why no deal is bad.

When people like JRM speak and say No Deal would not be a great danger if sufficiently planned for he isn't lying, a more sensible suggestion would be to use the 2 year transition period of any such deal with the EU to gradually move to WTO rules and sign trade deals.

For me what speaks volumes is the MPs that are supporting no deal. Almost every single MP advocating No Deal is a millionaire that doesn't have to worry about the cost of living increasing, shortages of goods because of delays at the border of people losing jobs as companies move their manufacturing processes overseas.

These MPs, with the likes of Farage and their friends in certain parts of the media have stirred up this narrative that there is something romantic about HMS Brittania severing all ties with the port that is the EU and sailing off into the sunset without any lifeboats, food or supplies and with no idea where it's going.

We all know the reality isn't so beautiful, but is was that exact narrative that saw Leave won the referendum. As BST mentions in his rreference to Orwell. They created such a narrative so appealing it gives these millionaire MPs the chance to paint themselves as champions of the working classes, ready to help take back Britain.

Edit: I wrote this after your initial post hound so haven't read the other responses yet. Apologies if I've gone over old ground.

[Jonathan]

You see, I said that you don’t know who to believe.
Now BST says it is a few dozen Tory MPs who are saying it and Wilts is saying it isn’t what the MPs have said.

Two forum experts telling me different things.

Reading the above I don’t think it’s contradictory. There’s little doubt that a small number of vocal Tory MPs will tell you no deal is okay - they’re all over certain news outlets. I don’t think Wilts was denying they’ve said it, more emphasising that the government’s own forecasts are more telling than the opinions of a few of their hardline (or power thirsty) MPs.

Very few back no deal for any other reason than the #LeaveMeansLeave strapline that is more often than not accompanied with a shuddering disregard of the potential implications.

[wilts rover]

Further to my post above, that I should have made clearer, Brexit will either be good or have no effect on the 2nd group of I people I describe, international financiers, hedge fund managers, importers, billionaires etc. Funnily enough several of the main Brexit supporting MP's, Rees Mogg, Redwood etc are connected with international finance so that gives them reason to support it.

I have yet to hear from any Brexit supporting MP on how it will benefit British manufacturing and farming? I hear plenty saying why it will be bad but dont remember any saying how it will benefit?

The only two major 'British' manufacturers I know off who have said Brexit will be good are Dyson (who manufactures his washing machines and hoovers in Singapore so will benefit from scrapping import duties - and has been in dispute with the EU) and JCB - who were fined £22million by the EU for breaking competition rules.

[Glyn_Wigley]

Further to my post above, that I should have made clearer, Brexit will either be good or have no effect on the 2nd group of I people I describe, international financiers, hedge fund managers, importers, billionaires etc. Funnily enough several of the main Brexit supporting MP's, Rees Mogg, Redwood etc are connected with international finance so that gives them reason to support it.

I have yet to hear from any Brexit supporting MP on how it will benefit British manufacturing and farming? I hear plenty saying why it will be bad but dont remember any saying how it will benefit?

The only two major 'British' manufacturers I know off who have said Brexit will be good are Dyson (who manufactures his washing machines and hoovers in Singapore so will benefit from scrapping import duties - and has been in dispute with the EU) and JCB - who were fined £22million by the EU for breaking competition rules.

Dyson moved his manufacturing to Singapore and elsewhere because those locations have existing trade deals with the EU...and we are about to throw ours away. So he'll be able not only to pay his workforce peanuts but then then get favourable import terms into the EU and all the other countries the UK will be at a disadvantage when exporting to.

[drfchound]

Ok but if MPs are elected to represent their constituents why would they support no deal at any cost to them.
Surely it would end their careers when it was seen how they had supported something so catastrophic.
After all, post Brexit life has to go on.

[Glyn_Wigley]

Ok but if MPs are elected to represent their constituents why would they support no deal at any cost to them.
Surely it would end their careers when it was seen how they had supported something so catastrophic.
After all, post Brexit life has to go on.

It depends what you mean represent their constituents. Do you think an MP should be their constituents puppet or their agent? A lot of Brexiters bang on with a ridiculous theory about how an MP should vote in Parliament according to how their constituency voted in the referendum.

[drfchound]

Ok but if MPs are elected to represent their constituents why would they support no deal at any cost to them.
Surely it would end their careers when it was seen how they had supported something so catastrophic.
After all, post Brexit life has to go on.

It depends what you mean represent their constituents. Do you think an MP should be their constituents puppet or their agent? A lot of Brexiters bang on with a ridiculous theory about how an MP should vote in Parliament according to how their constituency voted in the referendum.

There will be leavers and remainers in all areas, whatever way the final vote ended up.
There will be businesses which will suffer in all areas too if BST Is right with his assumptions.
Any MP who is responsible for bringing deprivation to his constituency by supporting a no deal Brexit (and therefore the reason for businesses closing down or leaving the country) would never get re elected.

[BillyStubbsTears]

Ok but if MPs are elected to represent their constituents why would they support no deal at any cost to them.
Surely it would end their careers when it was seen how they had supported something so catastrophic.
After all, post Brexit life has to go on.

Hound
Read what I wrote. There are some dogmatic, no deal-supporting MPs who genuinely do believe, against all the evidence, that we'll be ok after ND. But they are a tiny number.

The rest who are claiming to be in favour of ND have absolutely no intention of us leaving with ND. Precisely for the reasons you say. They are taking this position for reasons of the political state of the future Tory party. They KNOW that the grown ups will prevent ND happening and they want to be able to shout and scream "traitor" at them when they do.

You asked earlier who we should trust on the predictions of ND.

Who do you trust if you're ill? A doctor who has spent her career studying the treatment of that illness, or Jacob Rees-Mogg?

Currently, the longest span bridge in history is being constructed in Turkey (designed by Brits as it happens). If Boris Johnson told them their calculations were wrong, would you trust them or him?

When NASA were designing the rockets to send men to the moon, do you think they should have trusted Werner Von Braun, or whoever the equivalent of Nigel Farage was back then?

Pretty much the ONLY people saying ND will be OK are a handful of right-wing politicians. There's no nuanced argument going on amongst the people whose careers have been based on studying and predicting the effects of trade tariffs and barriers. They are pretty much ALL saying ND would be a catastrophe.

You say that I say it will be a catastrophe. That's not because I have done the numbers. It's too hard for a layperson. You need expertise. I've reached my conclusion by reading and listening to economists who have been right over and over again on previous issues. I trust their judgement. I don't trust Michael Gove's opinion.

On that point, why do you think so many Brexit-supporting MPs have spent the past three years telling you not to trust experts?

[BillyStubbsTears]

Hound

I'll emphasise again. They aren't MY assumptions. They are the predictions of people whose careers are predicated on getting these predictions broadly right. I'm trusting their professional judgement. That seems to me to be a more sensible approach than trusting Jacob Rees-Mogg's opinion.

[Glyn_Wigley]

Ok but if MPs are elected to represent their constituents why would they support no deal at any cost to them.
Surely it would end their careers when it was seen how they had supported something so catastrophic.
After all, post Brexit life has to go on.

It depends what you mean represent their constituents. Do you think an MP should be their constituents puppet or their agent? A lot of Brexiters bang on with a ridiculous theory about how an MP should vote in Parliament according to how their constituency voted in the referendum.

There will be leavers and remainers in all areas, whatever way the final vote ended up.
There will be businesses which will suffer in all areas too if BST Is right with his assumptions.
Any MP who is responsible for bringing deprivation to his constituency by supporting a no deal Brexit (and therefore the reason for businesses closing down or leaving the country) would never get re elected.

Any MP who votes for any form of Brexit are doing that though, aren't they...?

[Mr1Croft]

Ok but if MPs are elected to represent their constituents why would they support no deal at any cost to them.
Surely it would end their careers when it was seen how they had supported something so catastrophic.
After all, post Brexit life has to go on.

It depends what you mean represent their constituents. Do you think an MP should be their constituents puppet or their agent? A lot of Brexiters bang on with a ridiculous theory about how an MP should vote in Parliament according to how their constituency voted in the referendum.

There will be leavers and remainers in all areas, whatever way the final vote ended up.
There will be businesses which will suffer in all areas too if BST Is right with his assumptions.
Any MP who is responsible for bringing deprivation to his constituency by supporting a no deal Brexit (and therefore the reason for businesses closing down or leaving the country) would never get re elected.

We also live in an electoral system that means many 'blindly' vote for the Party and not necessarily the MP.