Brexit negotiations

This is outrageous, snide and downright dishonest. David Davis is now saying that MPs won't get their promised vote on the Brexit deal until AFTER we have left the EU. What a bunch of lying toerags!

Here.

What I don't understand is what those who want a second referendum hope to achieve.
As I see it, we will vote for, or against, what has been negotiated. Which, in effect, due to the lack of time and will on the EU side, is to accept what is on offer, or instigate a clean break. This has always been the case.
Bearing in mind the way the EU has behaved so far, the chances of them renegotiating, just because we want more, just isn't going to happen.

That's easy glos. You are ignoring this third choice of revoking article 50. What we want is not to leave the EU. Once more people understand just how bad it is going to be outside the EU I hope a majority will choose to stay in. Remember only 36% of the eligible electorate voted to leave. The decision was not handed down on tablets of stone from God contrary to the interpretation brexiteers tend to believe.

xmiles wrote:That's easy glos. You are ignoring this third choice of revoking article 50. What we want is not to leave the EU. Once more people understand just how bad it is going to be outside the EU I hope a majority will choose to stay in. Remember only 36% of the eligible electorate voted to leave. The decision was not handed down on tablets of stone from God contrary to the interpretation brexiteers tend to believe.

If the government did a u-turn you'd be slagging them off for the next 20 years, calling them weak and dithering old farts.

Natasha Whittam wrote:

xmiles wrote:That's easy glos. You are ignoring this third choice of revoking article 50. What we want is not to leave the EU. Once more people understand just how bad it is going to be outside the EU I hope a majority will choose to stay in. Remember only 36% of the eligible electorate voted to leave. The decision was not handed down on tablets of stone from God contrary to the interpretation brexiteers tend to believe.

If the government did a u-turn you'd be slagging them off for the next 20 years, calling them weak and dithering old farts.

No I would give them credit for being sensible.

gloswhite wrote:What I don't understand is what those who want a second referendum hope to achieve.
As I see it, we will vote for, or against, what has been negotiated. Which, in effect, due to the lack of time and will on the EU side, is to accept what is on offer, or instigate a clean break. This has always been the case.
Bearing in mind the way the EU has behaved so far, the chances of them renegotiating, just because we want more, just isn't going to happen.

MPs voting on whether we should accept the terms of a deal or even what we should do if there is no deal forthcoming is nothing to do with a second referendum Glos - it's to do with due diligence and specifically about ensuring that our elected representatives don't sacrifice the country at the altar of political advantage. 
The outcome of these negotiations will impact on millions of people for the rest of their lives and nobody in their right mind should even contemplate leaving that decision to one desperate person trying to cement her place in history.

This is treacherous.

To be fair to May, she can't really conscience a vote on something she's not studied and has no idea about:

https://www.standard.co.uk/news/politics/theresa-does-not-know-how-brexit-will-hit-economy-david-davis-says-a3668491.html

Unfuckingbelievable.....

Bread2.0 wrote:To be fair to May, she can't really conscience a vote on something she's not studied and has no idea about:

https://www.standard.co.uk/news/politics/theresa-does-not-know-how-brexit-will-hit-economy-david-davis-says-a3668491.html

Unfuckingbelievable.....

But that's the point of having the parliamentary debate that was promised - to assess what's on offer and evaluate what impact it will have from which point it can be decided whether or not to proceed or go back to the table.
Obviously it would help if our negotiators took full account of the likely outcomes before they agree to anything but the way it looks right now is that they intend to sign up for whatever and then discuss it after it's too late to reconsider - like a teenager getting a dodgy tattoo and then announcing it to her parents over dinner ...(analogising from personal experience there )

wanderlust wrote:

But that's the point of having the parliamentary debate that was promised - to assess what's on offer and evaluate what impact it will have from which point it can be decided whether or not to proceed or go back to the table.

Erm, yeah....I know.

That's why I threw the "unfuckingbelievable" in at the end.

Bread2.0 wrote:

wanderlust wrote:

But that's the point of having the parliamentary debate that was promised - to assess what's on offer and evaluate what impact it will have from which point it can be decided whether or not to proceed or go back to the table.

Erm, yeah....I know.

That's why I threw the "unfuckingbelievable" in at the end.

Sorry Dave - I was unsure whether the unfuckingbelievable referred to negotiating without knowing what a good deal looks like, not evaluating the potential outcomes of the elements or not letting our representatives debate it.

Is this what "taking back control" and "parliamentary sovereignty" looks like?

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brexit-theresa-may-studies-economic-damage-vote-mps-force-latest-a8032311.html

If it is, I'm all for it.

Bread2.0 wrote:Is this what "taking back control" and "parliamentary sovereignty" looks like?

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brexit-theresa-may-studies-economic-damage-vote-mps-force-latest-a8032311.html

If it is, I'm all for it.

There may well be 58 secret Government reports predicting damage to 88% of the economy, but doubtless the PM will refuse to release them on the grounds that brexcrement means brexcrement

Worrying trend.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-41838426

boltonbonce wrote:Worrying trend.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-41838426

Yes - but we'll have full control of an NHS without nurses.

wanderlust wrote:

Bread2.0 wrote:Is this what "taking back control" and "parliamentary sovereignty" looks like?

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brexit-theresa-may-studies-economic-damage-vote-mps-force-latest-a8032311.html

If it is, I'm all for it.

There may well be 58 secret Government reports predicting damage to 88% of the economy, but doubtless the PM will refuse to release them on the grounds that brexcrement means brexcrement

They're apparently trying to argue the toss over redacting anything which may be deemed prejudicial to our negotiating team's chances.

And they want to be the ones who decide just exactly which bits that covers.

This needs to be opposed if we are to avoid said impact studies subsequently being released as little more than pages and pages of blacked out text.

Looks like the Government will actually release the secret reports to ...erm.. the Government's own Brexit Committee after all. Or more precisely after they have agreed the security measures to ensure nobody outside the committee finds out what Brexit really means. Brextraprecautions here.

At least the Electoral Commission is finally investigating the leave campaign's funding.

And judging from his activity on Twitter today, Aaron Banks is shitting himself.

Good.

New word !!! Well done Breaders ... 'Brexcrement'


I get very brexcited when I see these. 

It’s telling that Leavers on this thread have given up on making serious comments.

T.R.O.Y wrote:It’s telling that Leavers on this thread have given up on making serious comments.

Welcome TROY and yes exactly.