Brexit

First topic message reminder :

Dolphin Ziggler wrote:

navyblueshorts wrote:

JuliusHMarx wrote:

SecretFly wrote:

Duty281 wrote:He doesn't have to 'prove his innocence', that's not how the justice system in this country works.

But it's how the world intends it to work.................... it's probably called neo-socialism - ooh, sex-Y!.  
Anti establishment thought crimes to be punishable by no trial and a bullet down some cavernous prison complex dedicated to 're-education' of political dissidents.

Sex crimes as well? I don't see many people one here leaping to Weinstein's defence.

Yep. I would, until and unless he's convicted. Otherwise it's just hearsay and rumour.

So would Arron Banks

Meaning?

That's the thing: Corbyn's popular with people who are unlikely to vote for any other (mainstream) party. This isn't who the Labour party need to be appealing to.

In a parallel universe, David Milliband beat his brother to the party leadership....

navyblueshorts wrote:

Luckless Pedestrian wrote:

navyblueshorts wrote:

Luckless Pedestrian wrote:It shouldn't really be news that the EU won't agree to extend Article 50 without a commitment that the government's position will change. The prime minister's done little but kick the can down the road for two years, they're not going to indulge her any further. It would be a waste of time and money for them as well as us.

Putting Theresa May to one side (I wish I could!), it's tragic that a government this inept has coincided with a leader of the opposition as godawful as Jeremy Corbyn.

Yep. Kind of funny, in a gobsmacked way, that Corbyn happy to talk to Hezbollah, IRA etc, but not the PM of HM Government at a time of crisis. Stupid man. Actually, given no-deal is default, May should call their bluffs and say she'll formally remove it as an actual option that the Government might pursue. If no other deal agreed by March 29th, and I can't see how that would be at all possible, it's no-deal anyway.

I'd like to know who's advising Corbyn, because he's making a dog's @rse of things at the moment. It's simple PR a lot of it. All he had to do was go and see Theresa May last night, even if they didn't say much. Instead, he's taken some of the heat off her and given her and the right-wing press an easy line of attack.

Labour also need to get rid of this idea of bringing about a general election as a means of solving the crisis. I agreed with Mark Francois for the first time yesterday, when he said of the motion of no confidence, "I know opportunism when I see it". Again, who's advising Corbyn? All yesterday's vote did was unite the Conservatives.

And they say this guy is a 'leader'. He's only there because of Unions and Momentum. He's been an MP for ages but never in Cabinet or Shadow Cabinet as far as I know. Why? Obvious answers: either he's schidt when leadership is required or he doesn't want a leadership role. Either way, him as Opposition Leader might give Labour leftists orgasms, but is helpful in no way at all.

So May spends 2 years working on a deal that gets hammered by the worst margin in history and you are slagging off Corbyn...

Oppositions oppose...May is PM hold her to account..

Last I looked the Tories were in charge..

Last I looked also Corbyn landslided two Blairite challengers..

Easy to slag Corbyn and he is crap....But he only has to be better than what's on offer to be PM..

Five out of six pollsters suggest he is...

Corbyn is LOTO because he is the only leader that remembered people were suffering because of Austerity..

Simple thing to remember you would think but alas Blairites were stuck in the Westminster bubble..

I think he should retire but REMEMBER it is the Tories in Govt..

navyblueshorts wrote:

Luckless Pedestrian wrote:It shouldn't really be news that the EU won't agree to extend Article 50 without a commitment that the government's position will change. The prime minister's done little but kick the can down the road for two years, they're not going to indulge her any further. It would be a waste of time and money for them as well as us.

Putting Theresa May to one side (I wish I could!), it's tragic that a government this inept has coincided with a leader of the opposition as godawful as Jeremy Corbyn.

Yep. Kind of funny, in a gobsmacked way, that Corbyn happy to talk to Hezbollah, IRA etc, but not the PM of HM Government at a time of crisis. Stupid man. Actually, given no-deal is default, May should call their bluffs and say she'll formally remove it as an actual option that the Government might pursue. If no other deal agreed by March 29th, and I can't see how that would be at all possible, it's no-deal anyway.

Perhaps you should stop reading anti-Labour papers..

The Chancellor has reassured businesses No deal won't happen.

Corbyn has asked for No deal to be taken off the table and talks can start..

Seems reasonable to me....Not his fault she is scared of Rees Mogg and his mates.

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:Corbyn has asked for No deal to be taken off the table and talks can start..

Seems reasonable to me....Not his fault she is scared of Rees Mogg and his mates.

The only way 'no deal' can be taken off the table is if a deal is agreed or if Article 50 is revoked, so I'm not sure what he's expecting Theresa to do.

Boles has an amendment next week that if it passes will almost certainly kill No deal..

Corbyn is asking for a commitment from May..

Knows he won't get it..

Never interfere when your enemy is imploding..

Labour aren't in charge of Brexit....Best think to do is watch..

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:Boles has an amendment next week that if it passes will almost certainly kill No deal..

No he doesn't. All Boles' bill does is compel the government to request an extension to article 50 if they cannot agree on an alternative plan. No guarantee that the EU will agree to this extension request (or even that the Commons will eventually agree to it) and, even if they do agree, this merely pushes the no deal default a few months further down the line.

And that's if the bill passes! Hasn't even had a second reading yet.

Puts the Brexit process in the hands of the liaison committee..

Benn...Cooper..Boles etc...Ruling out No deal..

Good 'Spectator' piece on it..

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:Puts the Brexit process in the hands of the liaison committee..

No it doesn't. They would suggest and agree upon the alternative plan, yes, but that plan would have to be agreed by the Commons as well.

Spoiler:

Quite simply, time is running out. 'A few weeks to propose and obtain...' - if we got to this point, there would barely be a few weeks left before leaving day!

It stops No deal being the default position..

The only way No deal can happen is by being the default..

I agree with your last sentence, but No Deal is still the default until either:

a) A deal is agreed.
b) Article 50 is revoked.

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:

navyblueshorts wrote:

Luckless Pedestrian wrote:

navyblueshorts wrote:

Luckless Pedestrian wrote:It shouldn't really be news that the EU won't agree to extend Article 50 without a commitment that the government's position will change. The prime minister's done little but kick the can down the road for two years, they're not going to indulge her any further. It would be a waste of time and money for them as well as us.

Putting Theresa May to one side (I wish I could!), it's tragic that a government this inept has coincided with a leader of the opposition as godawful as Jeremy Corbyn.

Yep. Kind of funny, in a gobsmacked way, that Corbyn happy to talk to Hezbollah, IRA etc, but not the PM of HM Government at a time of crisis. Stupid man. Actually, given no-deal is default, May should call their bluffs and say she'll formally remove it as an actual option that the Government might pursue. If no other deal agreed by March 29th, and I can't see how that would be at all possible, it's no-deal anyway.

I'd like to know who's advising Corbyn, because he's making a dog's @rse of things at the moment. It's simple PR a lot of it. All he had to do was go and see Theresa May last night, even if they didn't say much. Instead, he's taken some of the heat off her and given her and the right-wing press an easy line of attack.

Labour also need to get rid of this idea of bringing about a general election as a means of solving the crisis. I agreed with Mark Francois for the first time yesterday, when he said of the motion of no confidence, "I know opportunism when I see it". Again, who's advising Corbyn? All yesterday's vote did was unite the Conservatives.

And they say this guy is a 'leader'. He's only there because of Unions and Momentum. He's been an MP for ages but never in Cabinet or Shadow Cabinet as far as I know. Why? Obvious answers: either he's schidt when leadership is required or he doesn't want a leadership role. Either way, him as Opposition Leader might give Labour leftists orgasms, but is helpful in no way at all.

So May spends 2 years working on a deal that gets hammered by the worst margin in history and you are slagging off Corbyn...

Oppositions oppose...May is PM hold her to account..

Last I looked the Tories were in charge..

Last I looked also Corbyn landslided two Blairite challengers..

Easy to slag Corbyn and he is crap....But he only has to be better than what's on offer to be PM..

Five out of six pollsters suggest he is...

Corbyn is LOTO because he is the only leader that remembered people were suffering because of Austerity..

Simple thing to remember you would think but alas Blairites were stuck in the Westminster bubble..

I think he should retire but REMEMBER it is the Tories in Govt..

Yep. Get all that. Just to be clear, I don't think May has demonstrated that she's better. Easy to oppose though. Corbyn trashed Blairite challengers because he's leftist, that's it. Being leftist doesn't equate to being a good leader and he isn't. IMO.

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:

navyblueshorts wrote:

Luckless Pedestrian wrote:It shouldn't really be news that the EU won't agree to extend Article 50 without a commitment that the government's position will change. The prime minister's done little but kick the can down the road for two years, they're not going to indulge her any further. It would be a waste of time and money for them as well as us.

Putting Theresa May to one side (I wish I could!), it's tragic that a government this inept has coincided with a leader of the opposition as godawful as Jeremy Corbyn.

Yep. Kind of funny, in a gobsmacked way, that Corbyn happy to talk to Hezbollah, IRA etc, but not the PM of HM Government at a time of crisis. Stupid man. Actually, given no-deal is default, May should call their bluffs and say she'll formally remove it as an actual option that the Government might pursue. If no other deal agreed by March 29th, and I can't see how that would be at all possible, it's no-deal anyway.

Perhaps you should stop reading anti-Labour papers..

The Chancellor has reassured businesses No deal won't happen.

Corbyn has asked for No deal to be taken off the table and talks can start..

Seems reasonable to me....Not his fault she is scared of Rees Mogg and his mates.

I read plenty thanks, and I had to read nothing to know the above. It's not a matter of Editorial opinion. Corbyn is wasting time.

Corbyn is 'Opposition' leader it's his duty to oppose...

He wants no deal off the table and for the Govt to agree a permanent CU..

Then he will vote it through....He knows she won't but she is in charge not him !!

You do read plenty but...Viz... The Beano and Batman probably won't help in your understanding of the situation..

Opposition by definition means opposing.

If she wants his support she will have to give way.

Fact of the matter is May had had TWO AND A HALF YEARS to get us nowhere. Sure, Corbyn is not the flavour of the month with me or others but he has not had a chance to screw up the UK - the Tories have and succeeded with flying colours.

Lets remember where we are right now. No deal agreed to after two and a half years. I have heard a heck of a lot on this forum about how terrible the SNP are but they suggested two and a half years ago that Brexit be discussed by a cross-party committee and it was point blank rejected. Now with just two months before Article 50 is activated the Tories suddenly think it is a good idea. Pathetic Tories....ab-so-lut-ely pathetic.

The duty of the opposition is not to blindly oppose everything the Government proposes.

Duty281 wrote:

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:Puts the Brexit process in the hands of the liaison committee..

No it doesn't. They would suggest and agree upon the alternative plan, yes, but that plan would have to be agreed by the Commons as well.

Appears that the liaison committee don't want any part of it, so this section of the bill will be removed.

JuliusHMarx wrote:The duty of the opposition is not to blindly oppose everything the Government proposes.

Never said blindly..

Winston Churchill..."The duty of an opposition is to oppose the Government"

Corbyn has offered an olive branch..Permanent CU..

She should find the Bollox and take it.

So the olive branch is to break a Tory manifesto pledge, which not only goes against the referendum result but also the General Election result.
There is good opposition and bad opposition and then there is Corbyn.

JuliusHMarx wrote:The duty of the opposition is not to blindly oppose everything the Government proposes.

Could the same not be said in reverse.

In the last 36 hours since the massacre she took in the vote May has come out with more empty sound bites (her forte). She 'says' she is wanting to take in opinions from other parties and take onboard their views and ideas. And then she has point blank refused stating in any customs union, ruled out taking no deal off the table and as good as ruled out a people's vote. Gosh that alienates about every MP in the house then.

JuliusHMarx wrote:So the olive branch is to break a Tory manifesto pledge, which not only goes against the referendum result but also the General Election result.
There is good opposition and bad opposition and then there is Corbyn.

She has broken about 20 Manifesto pledges already including the single market...But like you said above..You know more about the Marx brothers..

I must admit the mirror scene in Duck Soup is absolutely superb..

A night at the Opera is an excellent movie..

Yeah, sure the Tories have broken pledges - they're sh1te. May's deal is sh1te. Which is why any decent opposition would be eating them for breakfast, lunch and dinner and be ahead in the polls by double figures.

My future invite to the 'Music section morning tea Society' is getting more distant by the minute.

I have no problem with the useless Corbyn being held to account...

But the main derision should be for the Tories calling a needless referendum..Losing it...Spending two years negotiating...culminating in a crashing..humiliating bang on Tuesday....

Now all the talk is Labour are useless.

Not healthy in Democracies for the opposition to be held to account more than the Govt..Truth to power is healthier.

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:My future invite to the 'Music section morning tea Society' is getting more distant by the minute.

I have no problem with the useless Corbyn being held to account...

But the main derision should be for the Tories calling a needless referendum..Losing it...Spending two years negotiating...culminating in a crashing..humiliating bang on Tuesday....

Now all the talk is Labour are useless.

Not healthy in Democracies for the opposition to be held to account more than the Govt..Truth to power is healthier.

Why didn't we call it that?  Bloody hell!

Not nice to see two of my favourite people on here snipping at each other like this.

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:My future invite to the 'Music section morning tea Society' is getting more distant by the minute.

I have no problem with the useless Corbyn being held to account...

But the main derision should be for the Tories calling a needless referendum..Losing it...Spending two years negotiating...culminating in a crashing..humiliating bang on Tuesday....

Now all the talk is Labour are useless.

Not healthy in Democracies for the opposition to be held to account more than the Govt..Truth to power is healthier.

Yeah, because no-one's been having a go at the Tories.

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:My future invite to the 'Music section morning tea Society' is getting more distant by the minute.

I have no problem with the useless Corbyn being held to account...

But the main derision should be for the Tories calling a needless referendum..Losing it...Spending two years negotiating...culminating in a crashing..humiliating bang on Tuesday....

Now all the talk is Labour are useless.

Not healthy in Democracies for the opposition to be held to account more than the Govt..Truth to power is healthier.

Lest we forget - Brexit is the mere tip of the iceberg. This Tory government are the first to be found in contempt of Westminster. They oversaw the disgusting Project Windrush that saw many legal British citizens evicted from the country splitting families and causing distress and gross embarrassment. They oversaw the Grenfell Disaster where Tory councillors ignored countless pleas from residents about the fire risks of the flats way before the fire. They have backed and pushed for disgusting things such as the r*** Clause and Family Credit that has left thousands of families in deep poverty. Also way back they denied nurses a pitifall wage rise saying there was no magic money tree but one blossomed from somewhere to pay the DUP millions for their support. So lets not kid ourselves that this is just about Brexit.

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:Corbyn is 'Opposition' leader it's his duty to oppose...

He wants no deal off the table and for the Govt to agree a permanent CU..

Then he will vote it through....He knows she won't but she is in charge not him !!

You do read plenty but...Viz... The Beano and Batman probably won't help in your understanding of the situation..

Opposition by definition means opposing.

If she wants his support she will have to give way.

You know, for someone who makes sarcastic comments when anyone else, at all, posts remarks like that, you're a remarkable hypocrite. Don't bother replying as I'll delete it.

Moving on...

JuliusHMarx wrote:So the olive branch is to break a Tory manifesto pledge, which not only goes against the referendum result but also the General Election result.
There is good opposition and bad opposition and then there is Corbyn.

Exactly. Some seem to (wilfully?) misunderstand/fail to understand this.

CaledonianCraig wrote:

JuliusHMarx wrote:The duty of the opposition is not to blindly oppose everything the Government proposes.

Could the same not be said in reverse.

In the last 36 hours since the massacre she took in the vote May has come out with more empty sound bites (her forte). She 'says' she is wanting to take in opinions from other parties and take onboard their views and ideas. And then she has point blank refused stating in any customs union, ruled out taking no deal off the table and as good as ruled out a people's vote. Gosh that alienates about every MP in the house then.

I have to agree with this. May said after her deal was rejected that she will open up cross party talks. Labour said they want no deal off the table and a customs union and she rejected that idea. The Lib dems, Greens and the SNP want a people's vote and she has rejected that idea straight away.

In fairness according to The Observer she is taking Cable's 2nd ref idea on board..

It's Bollox of course because she's gone if she agrees to one....If the last 2 years have told us anything it is May will try to stay in Downing Street at any cost..

Cable...Corbyn...May all need to go this year and some kind of new focus and vision is desperately required to heal division..

Have a sinking feeling Boris Johnson will scrape into the last 2 in the Tory race..

If he does get on the ballot he wins and becomes the next PM...The membership are Brexiteer friendly.

Car bomb went of in (London)Derry last night, but Im sure a hard border in Ireland will be just fine.

I heard it described as 'reckless' which I thought a very strange description of a bombing.

Nice to see you on here Scotty..

See May's plan B looks very familiar...Sure I have seen it before somewhere..

In...out...Shake it all about....But please someone end this nightmare..

ICM.. Lab 40...Con 39
NCR..Con 41..Lab 39

Every poll just like the last too...

Like i said empty sound bytes from May. Her cross-party talks is complete nonsense given she refuses to talk about customs unions or any other sort of trade deals and ruling out suggestions. She has made it clear that she refuses to discuss removing her red lines or compromising.

This reminds me of the tale that Merkel apparently told of a meeting she had with Theresa May, where she asked May what she wanted from the EU, and May's reply was, 'make me an offer.' She still doesn't know how it works.

For anyone that watched or still watches Yes, Prime Minister: https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/jan/22/brexit-sir-humphrey-appleby-yes-minister

Superb.

CaledonianCraig wrote:Like i said empty sound bytes from May. Her cross-party talks is complete nonsense given she refuses to talk about customs unions or any other sort of trade deals and ruling out suggestions. She has made it clear that she refuses to discuss removing her red lines or compromising.

She's hamstrung by the referendum result, her party's manifesto, the DUP and many in her own party. She clearly feels that a lot of what you think should happen is going against several principles. Doesn't help the situation, but if people don't understand that, it's hardly her fault. Corbyn et al banging on and on about things she feels are non-starters is pretty lame.

Assuming the EU aren't going to re-negotiate any substantive details of the agreement already reached, I can't see much of a way out except a referendum asking one of two things:

1) Out with no-deal (default in any case as it stands)
2) Out with previously agreed deal that Parliament rejected

Option 2 would need significant time to arrange (so, request for A50 extension with fingers crossed that E27 agree), primarily so expert independent lawyers and whomever else is needed can explain exactly what voting for either option would mean prior to a vote.

We're screwed, basically.

If she can't / won't compromise, she shouldn't pretend that she can / will. That's another week wasted.

navyblueshorts wrote:

CaledonianCraig wrote:Like i said empty sound bytes from May. Her cross-party talks is complete nonsense given she refuses to talk about customs unions or any other sort of trade deals and ruling out suggestions. She has made it clear that she refuses to discuss removing her red lines or compromising.

She's hamstrung by the referendum result, her party's manifesto, the DUP and many in her own party. She clearly feels that a lot of what you think should happen is going against several principles. Doesn't help the situation, but if people don't understand that, it's hardly her fault. Corbyn et al banging on and on about things she feels are non-starters is pretty lame.

Assuming the EU aren't going to re-negotiate any substantive details of the agreement already reached, I can't see much of a way out except a referendum asking one of two things:

1) Out with no-deal (default in any case as it stands)
2) Out with previously agreed deal that Parliament rejected

Option 2 would need significant time to arrange (so, request for A50 extension with fingers crossed that E27 agree), primarily so expert independent lawyers and whomever else is needed can explain exactly what voting for either option would mean prior to a vote.

We're screwed, basically.

The problem is she has told us ad nauseum that Labour want a second referendum and her Party is the only one that wants to deliver Brexit...

navyblueshorts wrote:

CaledonianCraig wrote:Like i said empty sound bytes from May. Her cross-party talks is complete nonsense given she refuses to talk about customs unions or any other sort of trade deals and ruling out suggestions. She has made it clear that she refuses to discuss removing her red lines or compromising.

She's hamstrung by the referendum result, her party's manifesto, the DUP and many in her own party. She clearly feels that a lot of what you think should happen is going against several principles. Doesn't help the situation, but if people don't understand that, it's hardly her fault. Corbyn et al banging on and on about things she feels are non-starters is pretty lame.

Assuming the EU aren't going to re-negotiate any substantive details of the agreement already reached, I can't see much of a way out except a referendum asking one of two things:

1) Out with no-deal (default in any case as it stands)
2) Out with previously agreed deal that Parliament rejected

Option 2 would need significant time to arrange (so, request for A50 extension with fingers crossed that E27 agree), primarily so expert independent lawyers and whomever else is needed can explain exactly what voting for either option would mean prior to a vote.

We're screwed, basically.

Basically, she was BSing to everyone. She told the house yesterday that she was open to talks and opinions - that is her side of things. Corbyn then claimed it was an empty gesture as she wasn't for budging which she denied. But Ian Blackford (SNP Leader) seem to back what Corbyn said as she was not for listening. She has wasted two and a half years and has finally got round to claiming to do what the SNP suggesting as soon as the Brexit result was announced. Various MPs yesterday cornered her and asked if she'd put up votes on things such as a CU or another referendum or pausing activation of Article 50 and she could not bring herself to say she would do that.

On your final point we were screwed a very long time ago only the Tories are in complete denial.

CaledonianCraig wrote:

navyblueshorts wrote:

CaledonianCraig wrote:Like i said empty sound bytes from May. Her cross-party talks is complete nonsense given she refuses to talk about customs unions or any other sort of trade deals and ruling out suggestions. She has made it clear that she refuses to discuss removing her red lines or compromising.

She's hamstrung by the referendum result, her party's manifesto, the DUP and many in her own party. She clearly feels that a lot of what you think should happen is going against several principles. Doesn't help the situation, but if people don't understand that, it's hardly her fault. Corbyn et al banging on and on about things she feels are non-starters is pretty lame.

Assuming the EU aren't going to re-negotiate any substantive details of the agreement already reached, I can't see much of a way out except a referendum asking one of two things:

1) Out with no-deal (default in any case as it stands)
2) Out with previously agreed deal that Parliament rejected

Option 2 would need significant time to arrange (so, request for A50 extension with fingers crossed that E27 agree), primarily so expert independent lawyers and whomever else is needed can explain exactly what voting for either option would mean prior to a vote.

We're screwed, basically.

Basically, she was BSing to everyone. She told the house yesterday that she was open to talks and opinions - that is her side of things. Corbyn then claimed it was an empty gesture as she wasn't for budging which she denied. But Ian Blackford (SNP Leader) seem to back what Corbyn said as she was not for listening. She has wasted two and a half years and has finally got round to claiming to do what the SNP suggesting as soon as the Brexit result was announced. Various MPs yesterday cornered her and asked if she'd put up votes on things such as a CU or another referendum or pausing activation of Article 50 and she could not bring herself to say she would do that.

On your final point we were screwed a very long time ago only the Tories are in complete denial.

Ah, forgot. Sorry. SNP infallible. Had the solution all along. Everyone else go home - the SNP have sorted it; what a relief.

She's spoken to people. They disagree on what's doable. End of. As much a fault of Blackford/Corby etc as May. If they suggest rubbish that they know she won't/can't agree to, who's more at fault? They're all as bad as each other. If she (and her party/Cabinet) think some lines are uncrossable for referendum/manifesto reasons, why is it that you and your ilk know better?

I'm not a May supporter per se, but the bollox peddled on both sides is amazing.

James Dyson believes in Brexit that much that upping sticks and moving to Singapore. You know, that country that have just signed a massive FTA with the EU.

I honestly cant see how people still buy into this nonsense. The wool has well and truly been pulled over peoples eyes.

SNP...Labour will support a Permanent CU and enough Tories will...to put May's deal through if she made that amendment..

So let's stop with the everyone is at fault crap..She cancelled a meeting with Sturgeon today..So much for cross Party talks..

May is all over the place because she spends all her time thinking of ways of keeping her job...All she cares about !!

A permanent Custom's Union will see the end of her but it's the best way forward for Britain...There isn't a majority for a second referendum.

Time to start seeing the bigger picture and let the Country move on.

navyblueshorts wrote:

CaledonianCraig wrote:

navyblueshorts wrote:

CaledonianCraig wrote:Like i said empty sound bytes from May. Her cross-party talks is complete nonsense given she refuses to talk about customs unions or any other sort of trade deals and ruling out suggestions. She has made it clear that she refuses to discuss removing her red lines or compromising.

She's hamstrung by the referendum result, her party's manifesto, the DUP and many in her own party. She clearly feels that a lot of what you think should happen is going against several principles. Doesn't help the situation, but if people don't understand that, it's hardly her fault. Corbyn et al banging on and on about things she feels are non-starters is pretty lame.

Assuming the EU aren't going to re-negotiate any substantive details of the agreement already reached, I can't see much of a way out except a referendum asking one of two things:

1) Out with no-deal (default in any case as it stands)
2) Out with previously agreed deal that Parliament rejected

Option 2 would need significant time to arrange (so, request for A50 extension with fingers crossed that E27 agree), primarily so expert independent lawyers and whomever else is needed can explain exactly what voting for either option would mean prior to a vote.

We're screwed, basically.

Basically, she was BSing to everyone. She told the house yesterday that she was open to talks and opinions - that is her side of things. Corbyn then claimed it was an empty gesture as she wasn't for budging which she denied. But Ian Blackford (SNP Leader) seem to back what Corbyn said as she was not for listening. She has wasted two and a half years and has finally got round to claiming to do what the SNP suggesting as soon as the Brexit result was announced. Various MPs yesterday cornered her and asked if she'd put up votes on things such as a CU or another referendum or pausing activation of Article 50 and she could not bring herself to say she would do that.

On your final point we were screwed a very long time ago only the Tories are in complete denial.

Ah, forgot. Sorry. SNP infallible. Had the solution all along. Everyone else go home - the SNP have sorted it; what a relief.

She's spoken to people. They disagree on what's doable. End of. As much a fault of Blackford/Corby etc as May. If they suggest rubbish that they know she won't/can't agree to, who's more at fault? They're all as bad as each other. If she (and her party/Cabinet) think some lines are uncrossable for referendum/manifesto reasons, why is it that you and your ilk know better?

I'm not a May supporter per se, but the bollox peddled on both sides is amazing.

You really are kidding yourself aren't you? Who insisted on Brexit being a Tory exclusive matter? And who is it two and a half years later who are no further down the line nearer to a deal? Answer to both are the Tories. Who then claims to want cross-party ideas two and a half years after the SNP (and others) suggested it and then dismiss every idea put forward by these cross-parties? Answer again the Tories.

But of course it is everyone's fault.

CaledonianCraig wrote:

navyblueshorts wrote:

CaledonianCraig wrote:

navyblueshorts wrote:

CaledonianCraig wrote:Like i said empty sound bytes from May. Her cross-party talks is complete nonsense given she refuses to talk about customs unions or any other sort of trade deals and ruling out suggestions. She has made it clear that she refuses to discuss removing her red lines or compromising.

She's hamstrung by the referendum result, her party's manifesto, the DUP and many in her own party. She clearly feels that a lot of what you think should happen is going against several principles. Doesn't help the situation, but if people don't understand that, it's hardly her fault. Corbyn et al banging on and on about things she feels are non-starters is pretty lame.

Assuming the EU aren't going to re-negotiate any substantive details of the agreement already reached, I can't see much of a way out except a referendum asking one of two things:

1) Out with no-deal (default in any case as it stands)
2) Out with previously agreed deal that Parliament rejected

Option 2 would need significant time to arrange (so, request for A50 extension with fingers crossed that E27 agree), primarily so expert independent lawyers and whomever else is needed can explain exactly what voting for either option would mean prior to a vote.

We're screwed, basically.

Basically, she was BSing to everyone. She told the house yesterday that she was open to talks and opinions - that is her side of things. Corbyn then claimed it was an empty gesture as she wasn't for budging which she denied. But Ian Blackford (SNP Leader) seem to back what Corbyn said as she was not for listening. She has wasted two and a half years and has finally got round to claiming to do what the SNP suggesting as soon as the Brexit result was announced. Various MPs yesterday cornered her and asked if she'd put up votes on things such as a CU or another referendum or pausing activation of Article 50 and she could not bring herself to say she would do that.

On your final point we were screwed a very long time ago only the Tories are in complete denial.

Ah, forgot. Sorry. SNP infallible. Had the solution all along. Everyone else go home - the SNP have sorted it; what a relief.

She's spoken to people. They disagree on what's doable. End of. As much a fault of Blackford/Corby etc as May. If they suggest rubbish that they know she won't/can't agree to, who's more at fault? They're all as bad as each other. If she (and her party/Cabinet) think some lines are uncrossable for referendum/manifesto reasons, why is it that you and your ilk know better?

I'm not a May supporter per se, but the bollox peddled on both sides is amazing.

You really are kidding yourself aren't you? Who insisted on Brexit being a Tory exclusive matter? And who is it two and a half years later who are no further down the line nearer to a deal? Answer to both are the Tories. Who then claims to want cross-party ideas two and a half years after the SNP (and others) suggested it and then dismiss every idea put forward by these cross-parties? Answer again the Tories.

But of course it is everyone's fault.

Spot on...Spent 2 1/2 years doing diddly and now it's all last minute crap..

She makes John Major look like Abraham Lincoln.

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:

CaledonianCraig wrote:

navyblueshorts wrote:

CaledonianCraig wrote:

navyblueshorts wrote:

CaledonianCraig wrote:Like i said empty sound bytes from May. Her cross-party talks is complete nonsense given she refuses to talk about customs unions or any other sort of trade deals and ruling out suggestions. She has made it clear that she refuses to discuss removing her red lines or compromising.

She's hamstrung by the referendum result, her party's manifesto, the DUP and many in her own party. She clearly feels that a lot of what you think should happen is going against several principles. Doesn't help the situation, but if people don't understand that, it's hardly her fault. Corbyn et al banging on and on about things she feels are non-starters is pretty lame.

Assuming the EU aren't going to re-negotiate any substantive details of the agreement already reached, I can't see much of a way out except a referendum asking one of two things:

1) Out with no-deal (default in any case as it stands)
2) Out with previously agreed deal that Parliament rejected

Option 2 would need significant time to arrange (so, request for A50 extension with fingers crossed that E27 agree), primarily so expert independent lawyers and whomever else is needed can explain exactly what voting for either option would mean prior to a vote.

We're screwed, basically.

Basically, she was BSing to everyone. She told the house yesterday that she was open to talks and opinions - that is her side of things. Corbyn then claimed it was an empty gesture as she wasn't for budging which she denied. But Ian Blackford (SNP Leader) seem to back what Corbyn said as she was not for listening. She has wasted two and a half years and has finally got round to claiming to do what the SNP suggesting as soon as the Brexit result was announced. Various MPs yesterday cornered her and asked if she'd put up votes on things such as a CU or another referendum or pausing activation of Article 50 and she could not bring herself to say she would do that.

On your final point we were screwed a very long time ago only the Tories are in complete denial.

Ah, forgot. Sorry. SNP infallible. Had the solution all along. Everyone else go home - the SNP have sorted it; what a relief.

She's spoken to people. They disagree on what's doable. End of. As much a fault of Blackford/Corby etc as May. If they suggest rubbish that they know she won't/can't agree to, who's more at fault? They're all as bad as each other. If she (and her party/Cabinet) think some lines are uncrossable for referendum/manifesto reasons, why is it that you and your ilk know better?

I'm not a May supporter per se, but the bollox peddled on both sides is amazing.

You really are kidding yourself aren't you? Who insisted on Brexit being a Tory exclusive matter? And who is it two and a half years later who are no further down the line nearer to a deal? Answer to both are the Tories. Who then claims to want cross-party ideas two and a half years after the SNP (and others) suggested it and then dismiss every idea put forward by these cross-parties? Answer again the Tories.

But of course it is everyone's fault.

Spot on...Spent 2 1/2 years doing diddly and now it's all last minute crap..

She makes John Major look like Abraham Lincoln.

Of course.

They sold the UK down the river with empty boasts such as 'Strong and stable' (what a bloody hilarious laugh that one is) and at the last GE as being the only party capable of delivering on Brexit. Oh how the mighty have fallen.

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:SNP...Labour will support a Permanent CU and enough Tories will...to put May's deal through if she made that amendment..

So let's stop with the everyone is at fault crap..She cancelled a meeting with Sturgeon today..So much for cross Party talks..

May is all over the place because she spends all her time thinking of ways of keeping her job...All she cares about !!

A permanent Custom's Union will see the end of her but it's the best way forward for Britain...There isn't a majority for a second referendum.

Time to start seeing the bigger picture and let the Country move on.

A continued CU is pretty much anathema to those that voted Brexit. What is it about that, that some don't get? I voted remain and would do so again, but why is it that I can understand some of the concerns of those that didn't re. any deal that's on the table, when others can't?

If May quit as PM, or had done so some time back, there would simply have been an avowed Brexiteer as PM. Nothing would have changed, unless in fact we had a confirmed no-deal as the target of HM Government.

navyblueshorts wrote:

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:SNP...Labour will support a Permanent CU and enough Tories will...to put May's deal through if she made that amendment..

So let's stop with the everyone is at fault crap..She cancelled a meeting with Sturgeon today..So much for cross Party talks..

May is all over the place because she spends all her time thinking of ways of keeping her job...All she cares about !!

A permanent Custom's Union will see the end of her but it's the best way forward for Britain...There isn't a majority for a second referendum.

Time to start seeing the bigger picture and let the Country move on.

A continued CU is pretty much anathema to those that voted Brexit. What is it about that, that some don't get? I voted remain and would do so again, but why is it that I can understand some of the concerns of those that didn't re. any deal that's on the table, when others can't?

If May quit as PM, or had done so some time back, there would simply have been an avowed Brexiteer as PM. Nothing would have changed, unless in fact we had a confirmed no-deal as the target of HM Government.

I do get your point but please lets not kid ourselves that May's deal is anything like Brexit as advertised before the vote because it ain't. We are not going to get anything that closely resembles what Brexit was meant to be because of the issues with the border with Northern Ireland - something pro-Brexit campaigners never even mentioned in canvassing. If the government want as close to Brexit as is possible then the answer is simple - no deal Brexit. As I posted the other day what was on the table from May means no powers to discuss own deals elsewhere as Brexit promised as we are still semi-tied to the EU, the ECJ would still hold sway on several laws so it does not mean powers will be taken back of laws and so you see her deal has flaws to Brexit as well. Now a Brexit deal with CU may get passed by Westminster - her deal won't.

CaledonianCraig wrote:

navyblueshorts wrote:

CaledonianCraig wrote:

navyblueshorts wrote:

CaledonianCraig wrote:Like i said empty sound bytes from May. Her cross-party talks is complete nonsense given she refuses to talk about customs unions or any other sort of trade deals and ruling out suggestions. She has made it clear that she refuses to discuss removing her red lines or compromising.

She's hamstrung by the referendum result, her party's manifesto, the DUP and many in her own party. She clearly feels that a lot of what you think should happen is going against several principles. Doesn't help the situation, but if people don't understand that, it's hardly her fault. Corbyn et al banging on and on about things she feels are non-starters is pretty lame.

Assuming the EU aren't going to re-negotiate any substantive details of the agreement already reached, I can't see much of a way out except a referendum asking one of two things:

1) Out with no-deal (default in any case as it stands)
2) Out with previously agreed deal that Parliament rejected

Option 2 would need significant time to arrange (so, request for A50 extension with fingers crossed that E27 agree), primarily so expert independent lawyers and whomever else is needed can explain exactly what voting for either option would mean prior to a vote.

We're screwed, basically.

Basically, she was BSing to everyone. She told the house yesterday that she was open to talks and opinions - that is her side of things. Corbyn then claimed it was an empty gesture as she wasn't for budging which she denied. But Ian Blackford (SNP Leader) seem to back what Corbyn said as she was not for listening. She has wasted two and a half years and has finally got round to claiming to do what the SNP suggesting as soon as the Brexit result was announced. Various MPs yesterday cornered her and asked if she'd put up votes on things such as a CU or another referendum or pausing activation of Article 50 and she could not bring herself to say she would do that.

On your final point we were screwed a very long time ago only the Tories are in complete denial.

Ah, forgot. Sorry. SNP infallible. Had the solution all along. Everyone else go home - the SNP have sorted it; what a relief.

She's spoken to people. They disagree on what's doable. End of. As much a fault of Blackford/Corby etc as May. If they suggest rubbish that they know she won't/can't agree to, who's more at fault? They're all as bad as each other. If she (and her party/Cabinet) think some lines are uncrossable for referendum/manifesto reasons, why is it that you and your ilk know better?

I'm not a May supporter per se, but the bollox peddled on both sides is amazing.

You really are kidding yourself aren't you? Who insisted on Brexit being a Tory exclusive matter? And who is it two and a half years later who are no further down the line nearer to a deal? Answer to both are the Tories. Who then claims to want cross-party ideas two and a half years after the SNP (and others) suggested it and then dismiss every idea put forward by these cross-parties? Answer again the Tories.

But of course it is everyone's fault.

WTF has the rest of the Commons been doing for over 2 years if it's been so obvious that May et al were so obviously stupid? Why has it taken until now for anyone to attempt to wrest control of this from the Government?

You don't get it about why these oh-so hopeful suggestions are non-starters do you? Like it or lump it, May and others see them as non-constructive and non-starters given the referendum outcome etc.

CaledonianCraig wrote:

navyblueshorts wrote:

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:SNP...Labour will support a Permanent CU and enough Tories will...to put May's deal through if she made that amendment..

So let's stop with the everyone is at fault crap..She cancelled a meeting with Sturgeon today..So much for cross Party talks..

May is all over the place because she spends all her time thinking of ways of keeping her job...All she cares about !!

A permanent Custom's Union will see the end of her but it's the best way forward for Britain...There isn't a majority for a second referendum.

Time to start seeing the bigger picture and let the Country move on.

A continued CU is pretty much anathema to those that voted Brexit. What is it about that, that some don't get? I voted remain and would do so again, but why is it that I can understand some of the concerns of those that didn't re. any deal that's on the table, when others can't?

If May quit as PM, or had done so some time back, there would simply have been an avowed Brexiteer as PM. Nothing would have changed, unless in fact we had a confirmed no-deal as the target of HM Government.

I do get your point but please lets not kid ourselves that May's deal is anything like Brexit as advertised before the vote because it ain't. We are not going to get anything that closely resembles what Brexit was meant to be because of the issues with the border with Northern Ireland - something pro-Brexit campaigners never even mentioned in canvassing. If the government want as close to Brexit as is possible then the answer is simple - no deal Brexit. As I posted the other day what was on the table from May means no powers to discuss own deals elsewhere as Brexit promised as we are still semi-tied to the EU, the ECJ would still hold sway on several laws so it does not mean powers will be taken back of laws and so you see her deal has flaws to Brexit as well. Now a Brexit deal with CU may get passed by Westminster - her deal won't.

Agree with this. They didn't think of the Irish border issue, just the same they didn't think of loads of other things. Doubt it ever crossed their minds until some civil servant pointed it out after the event.

navyblueshorts wrote:

CaledonianCraig wrote:

navyblueshorts wrote:

CaledonianCraig wrote:

navyblueshorts wrote:

CaledonianCraig wrote:Like i said empty sound bytes from May. Her cross-party talks is complete nonsense given she refuses to talk about customs unions or any other sort of trade deals and ruling out suggestions. She has made it clear that she refuses to discuss removing her red lines or compromising.

She's hamstrung by the referendum result, her party's manifesto, the DUP and many in her own party. She clearly feels that a lot of what you think should happen is going against several principles. Doesn't help the situation, but if people don't understand that, it's hardly her fault. Corbyn et al banging on and on about things she feels are non-starters is pretty lame.

Assuming the EU aren't going to re-negotiate any substantive details of the agreement already reached, I can't see much of a way out except a referendum asking one of two things:

1) Out with no-deal (default in any case as it stands)
2) Out with previously agreed deal that Parliament rejected

Option 2 would need significant time to arrange (so, request for A50 extension with fingers crossed that E27 agree), primarily so expert independent lawyers and whomever else is needed can explain exactly what voting for either option would mean prior to a vote.

We're screwed, basically.

Basically, she was BSing to everyone. She told the house yesterday that she was open to talks and opinions - that is her side of things. Corbyn then claimed it was an empty gesture as she wasn't for budging which she denied. But Ian Blackford (SNP Leader) seem to back what Corbyn said as she was not for listening. She has wasted two and a half years and has finally got round to claiming to do what the SNP suggesting as soon as the Brexit result was announced. Various MPs yesterday cornered her and asked if she'd put up votes on things such as a CU or another referendum or pausing activation of Article 50 and she could not bring herself to say she would do that.

On your final point we were screwed a very long time ago only the Tories are in complete denial.

Ah, forgot. Sorry. SNP infallible. Had the solution all along. Everyone else go home - the SNP have sorted it; what a relief.

She's spoken to people. They disagree on what's doable. End of. As much a fault of Blackford/Corby etc as May. If they suggest rubbish that they know she won't/can't agree to, who's more at fault? They're all as bad as each other. If she (and her party/Cabinet) think some lines are uncrossable for referendum/manifesto reasons, why is it that you and your ilk know better?

I'm not a May supporter per se, but the bollox peddled on both sides is amazing.

You really are kidding yourself aren't you? Who insisted on Brexit being a Tory exclusive matter? And who is it two and a half years later who are no further down the line nearer to a deal? Answer to both are the Tories. Who then claims to want cross-party ideas two and a half years after the SNP (and others) suggested it and then dismiss every idea put forward by these cross-parties? Answer again the Tories.

But of course it is everyone's fault.

WTF has the rest of the Commons been doing for over 2 years if it's been so obvious that May et al were so obviously stupid? Why has it taken until now for anyone to attempt to wrest control of this from the Government?

You don't get it about why these oh-so hopeful suggestions are non-starters do you? Like it or lump it, May and others see them as non-constructive and non-starters given the referendum outcome etc.

Barring a coup I do not see how else the government could have been removed. The SNP has consistently asked foe cross-party talks but got nowhere as Tories point blank refused.

As our messages appear to have crossed over one another read my last post to see I do get what you say about them being non-starters but so is May's deal a non-starter but she is still persisting with it. Her non-starter has all ready been massively rejected but a deal with CU involved may get passed and so we have a deal rather than no deal. Not what Brexit was meant to be but like I said Brexit was impossible from the start.