The UK Babe Channels Forum

Seems Yvette Cooper plans to bring a bill to the House on Monday that if passed would change the existing legislation that says we leave the EU on 29th March with a clause that says if no deal is agreed by 9th March the Government must ask for an extension of Article 50. This would remove a no deal Brexit from immediate consideration.

If this goes through then the immediate options will be Mays deal or a delay to Brexit.

CRASH OUT (as the media like to call it)...all shit scared of losing their EU handouts/gravy trains

(19-01-2019 23:52 )cwpussylover Wrote: [ -> ]CRASH OUT (as the media like to call it)...all shit scared of losing their EU handouts/gravy trains

Typical Brexiteer arrogance, As long as you can stick two fingers up to the Brussels Bogeymen, you don't give a fuck about this country or the people whose livelihoods are at stake.

In the event of no deal, British lorrydrivers will need to be issued with permits to drive in the EU.
The Government has made 1200 available.
The Road Haulage Association estimates 40,000 will be required...

thought EU had already made a backup plan that if the UK agreed if no deal happened there would be a year ammnesty for trucks to be able to drive in the EU

https://www.gov.uk/government/publicatio...ter-brexit

https://www.gov.uk/government/publicatio...march-2019

https://www.gov.uk/government/publicatio...march-2019

https://www.rac.co.uk/drive/travel/drivi...nd-brexit/

https://www.rac.co.uk/drive/travel/drivi...ng-permit/

(21-01-2019 10:57 )HannahsPet Wrote: [ -> ]thought EU had already made a backup plan that if the UK agreed if no deal happened there would be a year ammnesty for trucks to be able to drive in the EU

Really? No mention of that in the latest Government advice, which was published only two days ago... (Andy's third link)

(19-01-2019 00:48 )snookered Wrote: [ -> ]I am struggling to see the point of extending article 50 for two reasons.
Firstly on the assumption that the EU can be held to their word that they will not renegotiate the withdrawal agreement.
Secondly I have serious doubts as to whether MPs across the Commons chamber can or ever will reach a workable majority in favour of ANY exit strategy from the EU.
This is because there are so many 'red lines' in play in across both Conservative and Labour MPs that are incompatible. And to complicate matters further the EU also has red lines where they are seemingly not willing to compromise.

The biggest fundamental issue for me is that most of the Commons were and still are anti Brexit. This being the case makes agreeing on an exit strategy all the more complicated. The parliamentary will whether by accident or design seems to be to scupper, stifle and frustrate the very idea of Brexit actually happening.
The public will in the referendum was to leave the EU.
The public knew when they voted that Brexit negotiations could result in a successfully negotiated deal or a possible no deal.
In that knowledge they still voted to leave.

The will of the people in the referendum is proving subject to speculation and assumption on what the vote actually meant and the reasons for it.
Not only that but there are those who would argue the will of the people is being disrespected. The point is that the majority voted to leave NOT remain.

Not an easy thing for me to write because I voted to remain.

Some parliamentarians are in favour of a 'peoples vote' or 2nd referendum.
Once again however I have to question the value of such a proposal.
What happens if it finishes 52-48 in favour of remain?
Is the suggestion that such a result would override the result of the first referendum?
Those in favour of leave would have genuine cause for complaint if that were the decision. What happens if Remain won 51-49.
Does that mean Leave still win 101-99 on aggregate? .
Or should it be deemed as 1-1 and therefore a need for a 3rd and deciding referendum is required a year later. Best of 3, best of 5 etc etc etc.
Must win by 2 clear referendums .
Maybe if either Leave or Remain won the 2nd referendum by a big margin it might clear the waters somewhat.

There is an assumption by MPs that 'Remain' would have to be on the ballot paper almost as if it takes a higher priority than no deal.
But this is fundamentally wrong.
The question of to leave or remain is no longer the question.
That question has received it's answer already much to my disappointment but the result is the result. It must be respected.
To that end the question on the ballot paper should be 'How' rather than 'If' we leave.

If Parliament is incapable or unwilling to come to heal then maybe the public should rule on Theresa Mays deal v No deal.
Whatever they decide goes on the basis the will of the majority in a democratic vote must win the day.

There are many reasons why I believe a 2nd Referendum/People's Vote is the 2nd worst option (after revoking/stopping Article 50) aside from the fact it can never be legitimately known as a 'Peoples Vote' as it is only being represented by one side of the debate Remainers who don't respect & want to overturn the vote in 2016.From disillusionment from Brexit voters like myself who took the Government on it's word (& it's written declaration on the document that got posted to every house in the country)during the Ref that it would respect & implement the result be it leave or remain.So should a Government renage on their promise on the 1st Ref why should we believe them on a 2nd Ref or even on future GE's.And as Snookered touched on about how a result on a 2nd Ref bears any legitimacy over the 1st Ref for example what if on a 2nd Ref the result 52% to 48% was to remain on a turnout of say 25 million people that was much lower than the 31+ million turnout for the 1st would there be grounds that the 1st Ref has more legitimacy due to a higher turnout plus should remain win the 2nd Ref it opens the door for a best of 3 or best of neverendum scenario.That's just a few of the many complexities of a 2nd Ref aside from the fact that the people who don't respect the 1st Ref & want to overturn will never accept the result of 2nd Ref if the country votes to leave again.

One of the main reasons I believe a 2nd Ref is among one of the worst ideas as it solves virtually nothing other than encourage certain Parliamentarian's to tell the electorate to vote the 'right way' & not 'the wrong way' this time as a way of overturning the vote.Re-enacting a 2nd Ref requires between 6 - 12 months in time to plan & implement which will cause even more uncertainty for people & business.The main crux for me in the meaningless of a 2nd Ref should leave result win again is that Parliament have shown all the signs that the majority will never honour a 'no-deal Brexit' & so we will be in exactly in the same predicament as we are in now.There's also 'What should be the question on the ballot paper?' debate that even the most ardent of remainers cannot agree between themselves but the notion among some of them where putting Theresa Mays Withdrawal Deal against Remain on the ballot paper looks & smells like the biggest con-job as it got roundly rejected by Parliament why should the public have to vote for it.And should it be the binary vote to leave on a hard brexit or remain is just merely a re-run of the 1st Ref & if it's a question based on a deal,hard brexit & remain just splits the vote meaning a result can be won on less than 40% of the vote.

As what Snookered rightly touched on in the event of the un-palatability of a 2nd Referendum considering the vote to leave has been done so the question should be how we leave & this is Parliament were Parliament comes in to get consenus behind a deal or an arrangement (Norway+,Canada+ etc) then put a Parliament's Deal against a No-Deal.But as I have always said a 2nd Ref is one the worst of outcomes so the emphasis should be a Parliament to find a path & not shirk on their responsibilities or promises to the electorate.

(21-01-2019 14:14 )The Silent Majority Wrote: [ -> ]

(21-01-2019 10:57 )HannahsPet Wrote: [ -> ]thought EU had already made a backup plan that if the UK agreed if no deal happened there would be a year ammnesty for trucks to be able to drive in the EU

Really? No mention of that in the latest Government advice, which was published only two days ago... (Andy's third link)

Really should look at whats coming out of Brussels as well as london seems the EU have a plan in case things go south

Poland's Foreign Minister has broken ranks with the other countries and has suggested that the EU should meet Theresa May time limit on the Brexit backstop

He sees this as a way to move talks forward