Brexit shenanigans

[NBMisha 224]

So you're saying there's a chance?

[HenryJames 66038]

23 hours ago, NBMisha said:

Disrupting elections with misinformation is not a political cause as I would define it.   That's just me.

 

[bolverk 29659]

If May's deal gets rejected tomorrow, the pressure for a new referendum will be great. I really hope she caves before too long and allows the UK to collectively decide it doesn't want to drown.

Quote

U.K. Can Still Halt Brexit, Europe’s Top Court Rules

LONDON — Britain can legally cancel its decision to leave the European Union and remain under its current terms, the bloc’s top court ruled on Monday, throwing a lifeline to those who still hope to reverse the withdrawal, known as Brexit.

The decision, from the European Court of Justice, confirmed a recommendation last week by one of the court’s senior legal advisers. It comes one day before the British Parliament is scheduled to vote on a withdrawal plan negotiated by Prime Minister Theresa May.

Most analysts predicts that Mrs. May will lose that vote, with dozens of lawmakers from her own Conservative Party planning to oppose the deal — an outcome that could throw the Brexit process into flux and British politics into a deep crisis.

The government has felt compelled to deny speculation that the vote could be postponed because of the strength of opposition.

Mrs. May started the two-year exit process, under Article 50 of the European Union’s treaty, in March 2017, and Britain is scheduled to leave on March 29. She has vowed to carry out the will of voters, who narrowly approved withdrawal from the union in a 2016 referendum.

But the European Court ruled that Britain could withdraw its Article 50 submission before that date, as long as it did so in accordance with the country’s democratic and constitutional arrangements, and communicated the decision in writing. The reversal would not require the approval of the 27 other member countries, the court said.

The decision is a boost for those who still hope that Brexit can be stopped, particularly if Parliament votes against Mrs. May’s deal. It came a day after thousands of people gathered in London for competing protests by supporters and opponents of Brexit, demonstrating that the issue has lost none of its divisive potency.

Britain has received several special concessions as part of its current membership terms, including one that allows it to opt out permanently from any obligation to join the European Union’s single currency, the euro. It also gains a valuable rebate on some of its annual budget contributions.

Were it to remain in the bloc, these membership terms would be kept, the court ruled. The ruling was made under a special, expedited procedure because of the urgency of the situation.

The case was taken to the court by a group of politicians who want to keep a close relationship with the European Union, or to reverse Brexit, including Alyn Smith, a member of the European Parliament from the Scottish National Party. In a Twitter post, he described the judgment as a “total vindication.”

Even so, a decision to stop Brexit remains some way off. It seems likely that remaining in the union would require lawmakers to decide to hold a second referendum on whether to reverse the 2016 decision. So far, there is no obvious majority in Parliament for that step.

On Monday, Mrs. May was still fighting to win the vote scheduled for Tuesday and trying to win further promises from the European Union in order to reassure some pro-Brexit British lawmakers who are worried that her deal could leave Britain beholden to some European Union rules indefinitely.

Michael Gove, the environment secretary, told the BBC on Monday that the vote would go ahead as planned, and that Britain had no intention of reversing its decision to leave the European Union.

 

3

 

[kevwun 15771]

May postponed the vote.

[Fudge Nuggets 19189]

On 12/8/2018 at 3:13 PM, Biff Tannen said:

Some Limey on the TV just said my "lol, jk, let's vote again" solution is becoming more likely. 

I wish we could get a do-over on our 2016 election.

[horn4life 3759]

Brexit was ALWAYS stupid.  Sort of like... let's try a guy that won't show us his tax returns for President because... well... I'm mad!

I sort of wish the old thread wasstill around where I was trying to explain how it was never a good thing, arguing with somebody who was actually an economics asst prof, grad student or something.  I said then that it would hurt their economy and the pound in particular.  I was proven right and am even more right today.  The reason is it's easy as shit to throw rock and rile up the masses, it's a lot fucking harder to come to actual solutions.  Exactly why brexit Boris didn't want to do much beyond scream "let's Exit!"  

The problem is there is no way to exit the EU without hurting the British Economy.  If there was the folks that so supported Brexit would have had a nice neat plan of their own that would have tied up all the loose ends... But when you don't think ahead about the consequences of your actions... you end up with fucked up situation like Brexit, or Trump as our President.

Always easy to toss rocks you see... 

Edited December 10, 2018 by horn4life

[bolverk 29659]

1 hour ago, horn4life said:

Brexit was ALWAYS stupid.  Sort of like... let's try a guy that won't show us his tax returns for President because... well... I'm mad!

I sort of wish the old thread wasstill around where I was trying to explain how it was never a good thing, arguing with somebody who was actually an economics asst prof, grad student or something.  I said then that it would hurt their economy and the pound in particular.  I was proven right and am even more right today.  The reason is it's easy as shit to throw rock and rile up the masses, it's a lot fucking harder to come to actual solutions.  Exactly why brexit Boris didn't want to do much beyond scream "let's Exit!"  

The problem is there is no way to exit the EU without hurting the British Economy.  If there was the folks that so supported Brexit would have had a nice neat plan of their own that would have tied up all the loose ends... But when you don't think ahead about the consequences of your actions... you end up with fucked up situation like Brexit, or Trump as our President.

Always easy to toss rocks you see... 

You might be talking about Escriva. He was Mr. Pro Brexit over there, and I seem to recall he claimed some economics credentials. I halfway think Escriva = Zavala over here.

[David Dennison 18851]

They should just go ahead and vote again. This is a mess and if they don't get it right, not only is it going to have shitty economic consequences for the UK, but it might also be a precursor to renewed violence in Northern Ireland.

[bolverk 29659]

And cause a chain of events that could tank the global economy.

[David Dennison 18851]

Fucking gammons.

Edited December 11, 2018 by David Dennison

[atomheartbevo 89632]

 

[burntorangebongos 10710]

The Brits are so weird.

[Ghost of LL 15531]

The Brits are so weird.

Question Time alone would make rescinding the Declaration of Independence worth it.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Anastasis 23464]

55 minutes ago, Ghost of LL said:

Question Time alone would make rescinding the Declaration of Independence worth it.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I think Obama is the only recent president who might be quick enough on his feet with the quips in that environment. 

[hpslugga 4058]

8 hours ago, bolverk said:

You might be talking about Escriva. He was Mr. Pro Brexit over there, and I seem to recall he claimed some economics credentials. I halfway think Escriva = Zavala over here.

I always referred to him as Dunning Kruger

[cactusflinthead 27598]

Nah he ain't Zavala. Not nearly smarmy enough. 

Escriva. I don't miss him. It's easier to stab jello with a fork than to pin him to a mistaken idea. Dunning-Krueger. There's another e in there somewhere. 

[Bama Chick 28596]

I think Obama is the only recent president who might be quick enough on his feet with the quips in that environment. 

I think ole Slick Willie could have held his own in his prime.

[Thetexashammer 1062]

15 hours ago, Anastasis said:

I think Obama is the only recent president who might be quick enough on his feet with the quips in that environment. 

[Thetexashammer 1062]

No confidence vote coming

[Brisketexan 105086]

1 minute ago, Thetexashammer said:

No confidence vote coming

Seemed inevitable.  The UK has itself a nice little leadership crisis.  Because Red Jeremy damned well ain't a viable option.  WTF is it with major parties being led by utter shitbags/loons these days?

[High Plains Drifter 11035]

1 minute ago, Brisketexan said:

Seemed inevitable.  The UK has itself a nice little leadership crisis.  Because Red Jeremy damned well ain't a viable option.  WTF is it with major parties being led by utter shitbags/loons these days?

Its the dismal tide.

[Thetexashammer 1062]

12 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

Seemed inevitable.  The UK has itself a nice little leadership crisis.  Because Red Jeremy damned well ain't a viable option.  WTF is it with major parties being led by utter shitbags/loons these days?

It seemed to me a little while back, ever since Checkers, that "everybody knows" May is done. But an election creates massive uncertainty, to include the likely loss of the conservative majority. Left parties will straight up repeal the Brexit law.

So with the a negotiated deal ruled out, and hard Brexit happening on March 29, I thought their strategy was extend and pretend, to create as much delay as necessary to blow up the government and yet make it impossible to hold an election and reconstitute a new government in time to stop hard Brexit. 

But I don't know enough about the timelines or whether there are 'emergency procedures" to say that is what's actually happening.

Edited December 11, 2018 by Thetexashammer

[Ghost of LL 15531]

15 minutes ago, Thetexashammer said:

No confidence vote coming

Where are you seeing this?  I haven't seen anything official--just speculation.

There is an easy way out of this for May.  Call a general election, and at the same time put a Brexit referendum on the ballot.  That way, voters can choose "remain," get rid of that particular issue, and then vote for the Tories.  May would end up with more seats and be rid of the biggest problem facing her government.

[kevwun 15771]

I can't find anything official either.  It's not the first time a no confidence vote rumor has gone around.

[Thetexashammer 1062]

14 minutes ago, Ghost of LL said:

Where are you seeing this?  I haven't seen anything official--just speculation.

There is an easy way out of this for May.  Call a general election, and at the same time put a Brexit referendum on the ballot.  That way, voters can choose "remain," get rid of that particular issue, and then vote for the Tories.  May would end up with more seats and be rid of the biggest problem facing her government.

Delingpole reported it (more or less).

https://www.breitbart.com/europe/2018/12/11/brexit-britains-gilets-jaunes-moment-is-coming/

Quote

Since I began this epic, rumours have started circulating in the Westminster bubble that finally, FINALLY, the European Reform Group of Conservative MPs has come up with the requisite number of letters to trigger a no-confidence vote in Theresa May.

 

[Thetexashammer 1062]

Don't ask me to explain this, but the head of the 1922 is Sir Graham Brady. He needs 48 letters to trigger the vote. He has asked for a meeting with May tomorrow. There are reports of new letters being received.

I mean, it's on twitter so it's obviously true.

[GopherRock 1765]

Confidence motion against May as leader of the Tories or confidence motion against the Government?

Plenty of rumors of both, but there's a big difference between the two. 

[FondrenRoad 4378]

1 hour ago, Thetexashammer said:

It seemed to me a little while back, ever since Checkers, that "everybody knows" May is done. But an election creates massive uncertainty, to include the likely loss of the conservative majority. Left parties will straight up repeal the Brexit law.

So with the a negotiated deal ruled out, and hard Brexit happening on March 29, I thought their strategy was extend and pretend, to create as much delay as necessary to blow up the government and yet make it impossible to hold an election and reconstitute a new government in time to stop hard Brexit. 

But I don't know enough about the timelines or whether there are 'emergency procedures" to say that is what's actually happening.

They aren't going to hard Brexit.  Even if nothing happens between now and March, they've already agreed to a transition period until December 31, 2020 which will keep the UK within the EU's structure but removes the UK's ability to provide input into EU rules.  May is already trying to kick the can down the road past 2020 so that Ireland doesn't get fucked.  Can't kick that can forever though.

The EU has already decided that the UK can call off Brexit before March 29.  The real question is whether they will be able to call it off during the transition period.

Edited December 11, 2018 by FondrenRoad

[David Dennison 18851]

They should just have a do over.

[elfenix 34228]

41 minutes ago, David Dennison said:

They should just have a do over.

yup, now that there's a specific proposal there should be another vote.  and if there's anything i've learned watching austin try to tackle highways and transit over the last few decades, it's that specific proposals with clear winners and losers never win referenda. 

[Thetexashammer 1062]

2 hours ago, GopherRock said:

Confidence motion against May as leader of the Tories or confidence motion against the Government?

Plenty of rumors of both, but there's a big difference between the two. 

So, as I clumsily tried to say above, I'm no expert at parliamentary procedure. So, it does look like it's merely an election for a new party leader. 

That said, Wikipedia is wrong. 1922 Committee is here. 

Quote

Committee constitutional matters[edit]

The 1922 Committee has an 18-member executive committee, the chairman of which oversees the election of party leaders, or any Conservative party-led vote of no confidence in a current leader.

Link above is direct from the Wikipedia page. That page contains this link: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Motions_of_no_confidence_in_the_United_Kingdom

which states the following:

Quote

When such a motion is put to a vote in the legislature, if a vote of confidence is defeated, or a vote of no confidence is passed, then the incumbent government must resign, or call a general election.

I think you're right and Wiki is wrong.

https://www.express.co.uk/news/politics/1057592/Theresa-May-no-confidence-vote-what-will-happen-have-48-letters-of-no-confidence-been-sent

 

 

Edited December 12, 2018 by Thetexashammer

[GopherRock 1765]

So it's a confidence motion against May as leader of the Tories. 

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/amp/ncna946861

Vote expected between noon and 1 PM CST.

[HenryJames 66038]

 

[bolverk 29659]

If they sack her today, how do they expect to have enough time to find a new prime minister to renegotiate a Brexit deal (which the EU says is now nonnegotiable)? Or will they postpone their withdrawal in hopes of renegotiating? Or will they just force the UK to make a leap into the void with a hard Brexit under new leadership?

The analogy about watching a slow-moving trainwreck is particularly apt. 

[GopherRock 1765]

45 minutes ago, HenryJames said:

 

The irony is thick. 

[kevwun 15771]

48 minutes ago, bolverk said:

If they sack her today, how do they expect to have enough time to find a new prime minister to renegotiate a Brexit deal (which the EU says is now nonnegotiable)? Or will they postpone their withdrawal in hopes of renegotiating? Or will they just force the UK to make a leap into the void with a hard Brexit under new leadership?

The analogy about watching a slow-moving trainwreck is particularly apt. 

I think getting rid of May is the easiest way to cancel Brexit.  A new government has no obligation to leave and can back away from it without losing face.

Edited December 12, 2018 by kevwun

[Fozzz 152]

3 minutes ago, kevwun said:

I think getting rid of May is the easiest way to cancel Brexit.  A new government has no obligation to leave and can back away from it without losing face.

They may not be legally obligated but that would be pretty anti-democratic, no?

[kevwun 15771]

No, not if they put it up to another vote.  I see no issue with letting the people think about this again now that they have seen what a clusterfuck it would be.

[Biff Tannen 45669]

3 minutes ago, kevwun said:

No, not if they put it up to another vote.  I see no issue with letting the people think about this again now that they have seen what a clusterfuck it would be.

If this doesn't happen they are daft.  Just fucking re-vote.  

[hayden_horn 11362]

3 hours ago, Fozzz said:

They may not be legally obligated but that would be pretty anti-democratic, no?

i do think that @Brisketexan has it right with the "moving house" analogy. 

do you want to move out of your house? yeah, sure.

okay, here's what it's going to look like: you're going to move to bumfuck, oklahoma and live in a trailer. do you still want to move out of your house?

oh, well, when you put it that way....no, i'm fine here in austin, thanks.

also, funny anecdote: an english colleague of mine said that their current government and the idea of corbyn vs rees-mogg makes trump vs clinton look almost reasonable. lulz.

what a clusterfuck.

[relapse98 634]

3 hours ago, kevwun said:

No, not if they put it up to another vote.

Ooh, another non binding referendum? ooh.

[Rusty Shackelford 414]

On 12/10/2018 at 10:07 PM, burntorangebongos said:

The Brits are so weird.

Edited December 12, 2018 by Rusty Shackelford

[Pig Bellmont 8712]

I think this has the best analogy:

the whole thread is worth a read 

[retread 2951]

Love the corny/punny British humor in the comments. ^

[cactusflinthead 27598]

 

[cactusflinthead 27598]

 

[Bama Chick 28596]

[bolverk 29659]

6 minutes ago, Bama Chick said:

 

So, I'm interpreting this as a compromise reached that she will resign but not just now, because she/they want her in charge when/if Brexit goes through. But it also satisfies the desires of those who wanted her gone.

Am I reading this right?

Edited December 12, 2018 by bolverk

[kevwun 15771]

She told her party that before the no confidence vote according to this.

https://www.reuters.com/article/uk-britain-eu/pm-may-pledges-to-quit-before-next-uk-election-as-she-fights-leadership-challenge-idUSKBN1OB0K1

 

[bolverk 29659]

23 minutes ago, kevwun said:

She told her party that before the no confidence vote according to this.

https://www.reuters.com/article/uk-britain-eu/pm-may-pledges-to-quit-before-next-uk-election-as-she-fights-leadership-challenge-idUSKBN1OB0K1

 

According to this story, they'll be announcing results of the vote at 21:00 GMT which, if I'm doing the time conversion correctly, means we'll know at 3:00 pm CST.