Brexit - 2nd Referendum - The (Bradford City FC) Peoples Vote

All 650, sounds about right.

 

We negotiate a deal that the EU has not offered to any other nation, We get control over our borders including immigration and stop the free movement of citizens from the EU, The jurisdiction of the EU courts is removed, Payments after the agreed compensation are stopped and we are still in the customs union and free market for two years to allow a permanent trade/customs arrangement, The four indivisible freedoms they said could not be broken have been breached in our favour, The NI border is a problem that we have 2 years to come up with a solution, This is a good deal and a good start because without doubt where we find we are disadvantaged in the future we will as always fight hard to negotiate and adjust to get things to our advantage, In all agreements you have to start somewhere and both sides have to compromise which has happened, This is a good start for the future outside the EU and our MPs should vote for it

 

The 'agreement' is full of empty promises which may never be achieved ....we will still be begging for most of above years down the line..
All and more should have been cut and dried 2 years ago..

 

Get rid of the clause in the back stop to say we are the ones who decide when we come out completely.
May said the EU wouldnt want us to stay in the back stop longer than necessary, well if thats the case they shouldn't have a problem dropping that clause, that one item alone will scupper this deal.

 

We can only negotiate at the pace of the other side who are notorious at taking deals to the end of the time scale, As for a deal that lacks detail that is the normal way for the civil service do future agreements, This is for two reasons, The first is that no parliament may bind any future parliament in any agreement unless it is an international treaty, So when negotiating such treaties the civil service will always leave room for a change of policy in the years to come and can only do this by not putting in absoloute detail that may work against the country in the future, The second reason is is simulular in that when disputes happen then everyone reaches for the paperwork and legal agreements to enforce their view. The UK civil service knows this and has always left wriggle room in legal agreements to ensure we can argue our case rather than be bound by wording that cannot be challenged

 

The back stop is a red herring really to solve problems that will not exist, We have already said that we will not accept a border with the southern Ireland, For the North to stay in the customs union after the rest of the UK has left would need the vote of a referendum in Northern Ireland because it is a constitutional change to their status, Although the DUP are against that the people of NI who in fact voted remain may well want it and see the benefits of being inside the customs union, It would in fact be a great advantage to NI and the UK in trade terms and is another reason the back stop does not matter,
Our negotiators have been very clever because as it stands if a border has to be built for customs control then it will have to be built by the EU on the southern side as we have it in the agreement that the UK will not build a border in the UK

 

As James Callaghan said to a senior civil servant when he arrived at the FCO in 1974 "I hear you really care about Europe. Well, that's alright, as long as you remember I really care about the Labour Party."

Political parties in a modern democracy are in a sense designed to be self-serving and it would be strange if they weren't. Where I agree is the self-interest and riding horses to personal goals and ambitions ahead of their parties. Theresa May has averaged one cabinet departure every 8 weeks of her tenure I believe.

The reality of the situation has always been that you jettison Northern Ireland or you have a Brexit deal that has a degree of alignment with the rest of Europe. And since the 2017 election, losing Northern Ireland is not an option. It's baffling that anybody - politician or voter - believes that anything else could be possible after factoring in basic parliamentary arithmetic.

 

All well and good until Ireland said that they'd veto the deal without a potentially indefinite backstop. It's often like people don't realise that there are two sides to the table. It's even more surprising that people don't realise that this whole process was, from the outset, designed to stop people from leaving the EU.

 

The first vote has no chance of passing, absolutely zero. What happens next will be the defining moment.

Regardless of the rights and wrongs, I don't see any vehicle for a second referendum, I really can't envisage a scenario where the government dramatically changes its policy to call for one. The government are weak, but they're not that weak.

Then the next option, a general election? Perhaps. If the DUP are to effectively sever their confidence and supply arrangement, then there is no functioning majority in parliament. Regardless, once this vote is defeated, Labour WILL table a vote of confidence in the government and the DUP will be crucial here. There may also be a mad cap plan by certain kamikaze Tories to force May's hand and take it to the brink. Either way, if there is a vote of no confidence, there will be a 2 week cooling off period where they will vote again. The kamikaze Tories may well be forced into line in this period.

If there's no general election, what else? It's basically then down to this deal or no deal at all. Markets might start to get jittery and the HoC may be forced into acquiescing (think TARP). I think this is the most likely scenario. There's a small chance of a last minute renegotiation, but given the rhetoric to date between the two, this feels unlikely.

Either way, this is just the first of many hurdles. This is effectively an agreement on the future relationship. If we're under a backstop, then this will have to be unilaterally extended through parliament each time, there are loads of bumps in the road ahead yet, this is just the first one.

 

This TV debate. I won’t be tuning in to that shite. Much like Question Time and PMQ’s, it’s just an exercise in preaching to the converted and/or getting the usual people angry. Totally pointless, especially as there’s no public vote at the end of it, like there would be at a normal TV debate.

 

Apparently we subjects are all getting a letter from saint theresa, telling us what a wonderful deal she's got.
Only thing is, its the mp's that vote on the deal and its not like we will have much influence on them!
Unless of course she's thinking ahead and there will be another referendum part2 and please give the right answer this time.

Must cost a bit of money sending these letters out but i guess we can afford it.
Heigh Ho

 

it stinks doesn't it. don't forget Farage s German passport

 

More fake news for the gullible, His wife has a German passport as she is German, His children have dual British and German passports, He himself has a British passport

 

Ironically Rees-Moog has a 2nd ‘Investment’ Fund in Ireland. Wonder why he hasn’t patriotically put into the UK. https://www.irishtimes.com/business...-s-group-launches-second-irish-fund-1.3573675

More Mischief, If you take the trouble to read the article you posted you would have learnt that,
Because he is The fund manager not an investor, The client is a Swedish company that insisted it was set up in Ireland, It was not his decision.

 

Strong and stable, lol.

 

Ironic the EU wants to fund an army when the likes of France and Germany have not made the full contributions to Nato for years.

 

Why do remainers think they know why people voted leave.

It was a democratic referendum. We had our reasons as did you.

If anything the importance of the reasons I voted leave has increased immeasurably

And as for your comment about 'unelected bureaucrat" being just a stupid, empty, tub-thumping chant from the likes of the Daily Mail and the Express. Are you being serious? Maybe you need to read The Economist or how about this article from The Guardian.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/jun/27/eu-democratic-bandwagon-juncker-president-wanted

You raise some interesting points in your long post but do you not think it shows little respect for the many knowledgeable, well read and informed people who voted leave.

I do not read The Daily Mail and The Express. I read The Guardian, The Observer and occasionally the Weekend FT.