Sep 19: Want A Brexit Deal? -Tell Your MP

Goooner

Distinguished Member
The trouble is, our current parliament won’t let us play hardball, having no deal off the table and knowing we have to ask for an extension, why would the EU offer us anything?
 

CommonSense

Active Member
How will the French and Icelanders be harder on us?

It's international law - we have exclusive rights to exploit the waters 200 miles from our coastline. (With it being the middle point for things like the channel where our 200 miles and that of France clash).

And as I'm repeat for the last time, there can be no trust when the French are threatening to abuse agreements that we would enter in good faith.
I really don't know how we stand with the rights you stated above so I can't comment on that point. When I said the French/Icelanders would likely be tougher on us if No Deal results (rather than if we accepted the Deal), I mean that it would be a natural consequence of our most extreme response to the offer the EU is making. Compromise (Deal) attracts compromise, whereas No Deal is a more extreme response which would attract a more extreme reaction from EU members eg the French.
 

CommonSense

Active Member
I don’t disagree about the trust elements. However when there is a contract that describes alternative arrangements than those will take precedent in the unfortunate event of a dispute. As such all parties involved should always be aware of such matters and protect themselves for such events. Hopefully it is never to be used, however if it is then the contract is the version of the truth. That is why I would have a problem with it.
You say in your first sentence you understand my point about trust. But the rest isn't so plain but I think you are basically saying you don't trust the EU on the Withdrawal Agreement. That's ok, it's entirely your prerogative. All I'm saying about this Brexit situation is that whatever happens in Government and in Parliament, it will always come down to the decision Deal or No Deal. MPs who want no deal `taken off the table' are deluded and they are risking the very result they say Parliament won't allow to happen. Their tactical voting could backfire -the EU could unilaterally refuse a further extension of Article 50. Where would those MPs be then? If they really wanted a deal then they should vote FOR the Withdrawal Agreement -apart from No Deal there isn't another valid option. Individuals must seriously think about Deal or No Deal and choose what they want. And as far as I can see so far, your MP is the only point of expression where your voice might count.
 

CommonSense

Active Member
Why do you trust the EU and our government’s ‘Olly Robbins’ team? The EU want what is best for them. What we ended up with is a rather bad WA. It was rejected by all sides in Parliament- because it was not in the UK’s best interests. That deal, as it stands is dead. Put simply, the EU takes control over much of our destiny during the transition period. They could keep us in the EU...

If we submitted to the WA, and the EU realised they had us over a barrel, would you expect them to give us a favourable trade deal? What about the single market and open borders? What would the EU demand from us? No, May’s deal as it stands should be dropped.

A new approach is necessary. And I am afraid to say, trusting the EU to give us a nice deal is just a fantasy. They are playing hardball and we need to up our game.
Your statement `That deal, as it stands is dead' is plainly wrong. Yes, the Withdrawal Agreement was rejected 3 times but the EU hasn't withdrawn the offer.

You made several debateable statements and asked several questions which I can't answer, at least not right now, if ever. I might do some further reading of the Explainer for The Withdrawal Agreement and perhaps if you were to direct me to specific paragraphs in it that would help.
You also said: 'A new approach is necessary; They are playing hardball and we need to up our game.' So presumably your new approach is to play hardball. I suggest the hardest ball we have is No Deal and the idea of it being thrown at the EU, whilst they have said they wouldn't like it, hasn't changed their stance. If you play the bluff game you must be prepared for your opponent to call your bluff. I'm afraid that the EU has already called our bluff a long time ago and we have done nothing in response.
 
D

Deleted member 13294

Guest
I'm afraid that the EU has already called our bluff a long time ago and we have done nothing in response.
They have.

Originally they were unwilling to reopen the withdrawal deal.

Now they are.
 
D

Deleted member 27989

Guest
You say in your first sentence you understand my point about trust. But the rest isn't so plain but I think you are basically saying you don't trust the EU on the Withdrawal Agreement. That's ok, it's entirely your prerogative. All I'm saying about this Brexit situation is that whatever happens in Government and in Parliament, it will always come down to the decision Deal or No Deal. MPs who want no deal `taken off the table' are deluded and they are risking the very result they say Parliament won't allow to happen. Their tactical voting could backfire -the EU could unilaterally refuse a further extension of Article 50. Where would those MPs be then? If they really wanted a deal then they should vote FOR the Withdrawal Agreement -apart from No Deal there isn't another valid option. Individuals must seriously think about Deal or No Deal and choose what they want. And as far as I can see so far, your MP is the only point of expression where your voice might count.
You misunderstood. Trust has nothing to do with anything when there are agreements involved. The agreement take precedence over any kind of trust that may or may not be there. It’s an irrelevance.
 

Cliff

Distinguished Member
Your statement `That deal, as it stands is dead' is plainly wrong. Yes, the Withdrawal Agreement was rejected 3 times but the EU hasn't withdrawn the offer.

You made several debateable statements and asked several questions which I can't answer, at least not right now, if ever. I might do some further reading of the Explainer for The Withdrawal Agreement and perhaps if you were to direct me to specific paragraphs in it that would help.
You also said: 'A new approach is necessary; They are playing hardball and we need to up our game.' So presumably your new approach is to play hardball. I suggest the hardest ball we have is No Deal and the idea of it being thrown at the EU, whilst they have said they wouldn't like it, hasn't changed their stance. If you play the bluff game you must be prepared for your opponent to call your bluff. I'm afraid that the EU has already called our bluff a long time ago and we have done nothing in response.
Any deal, if it is still ‘live’ , has to be something both parties can work on. We can’t because it has been rejected by Parliament. So it’s dead.
I, hope that the paperwork of the old deal can be resurrected and it can be changed so that it is a good deal for both sides. But I just don’t think Labour, the SNP, or the LibDems would want to agree any deal that the Government gets, no matter how good. Do you?

Make no mistake, no deal is bad news for the EU and the UK. But both sides might see sense, and a deal that is win win might come out of it.
 

CommonSense

Active Member
Any deal, if it is still ‘live’ , has to be something both parties can work on. We can’t because it has been rejected by Parliament. So it’s dead.
I, hope that the paperwork of the old deal can be resurrected and it can be changed so that it is a good deal for both sides. But I just don’t think Labour, the SNP, or the LibDems would want to agree any deal that the Government gets, no matter how good. Do you?

Make no mistake, no deal is bad news for the EU and the UK. But both sides might see sense, and a deal that is win win might come out of it.
I think we have different views about whether or not the Withdrawal Agreement is dead and I won't say anymore on that.
I think your statement about Labour, SNP and LibDems is a bit generalised - I don't think they all have the exact same approach. However it is true that very many of them have voted tactically for No Deal and those tactics have failed and they are taking a big risk with our future. From what I have seen and heard the LibDems are openly campaigning to remain in the EU and this is outright defiance of the people's democratic mandate to leave the EU. I haven't heard much about Labour recently but I understand that they are campaigning for a referendum after a general election, though Jeremy Corbyn said he won't actively campaign one way or the other in such a referendum. This in my opinion shows he's weakening. As for the SNP, while the Government is trying to keep the country united (ie keep Northern Ireland 100% with the Mainland), the SNP is still banging on about Scottish independence so they can have their own way with EU membership. It's all pie in the sky which can not be achieved by 31/10/19. All the noise they are all making is just clutching at straws or downright self-interestedness and the Government is not fooled at all (though some Conservative rebels might be).
I hear today that Boris Johnson is formulating a new plan for the Irish Border and that he will give the EU an ultimatum deadline before 31/10/19. I support Boris Johnson if he's being genuine but I can't help thinking that his approach is flawed and I don't think this latest attempt has much chance. I think everyone has to see sense in this matter, but most of all Parliament. The future of our country rests with just approximately 650 MPs coming to their senses.
 

CommonSense

Active Member
You misunderstood. Trust has nothing to do with anything when there are agreements involved. The agreement take precedence over any kind of trust that may or may not be there. It’s an irrelevance.
But there is no agreement, is there? There is a proposal but it doesn't become an agreement until ratified by both sides. The trust required is that the proposed agreement is fair. If the Withdrawal Agreement was ratified and either said then breaks it then there should be redress through an international court.
 
D

Deleted member 27989

Guest
But there is no agreement, is there? There is a proposal but it doesn't become an agreement until ratified by both sides. The trust required is that the proposed agreement is fair. If the Withdrawal Agreement was ratified and either said then breaks it then there should be redress through an international court.
Well, there is no agreement that is agreeable ;) It was voted down 3 times. And the point I highlighted plays a big part in that. Don't get why you keep on going on about trust, trust has no meaning in this context.
 

CommonSense

Active Member
Well, there is no agreement that is agreeable ;) It was voted down 3 times. And the point I highlighted plays a big part in that. Don't get why you keep on going on about trust, trust has no meaning in this context.
Your previous comment 'Trust has nothing to do with anything when there are agreements involved. The agreement take precedence over any kind of trust that may or may not be there. It’s an irrelevance.' plus your latest comment above implies that a proposal can be made which is 100% agreeable to both parties and that ratifying it would be no problem to either of them. If that is the case, where is this ` dead-cert, no-strings-attached, no-trust-required' proposal? It doesn't so far exist and I am sure that if anyone can come up with one before 31/10/19 they will be hailed a hero.
 
D

Deleted member 27989

Guest
Your previous comment 'Trust has nothing to do with anything when there are agreements involved. The agreement take precedence over any kind of trust that may or may not be there. It’s an irrelevance.' plus your latest comment above implies that a proposal can be made which is 100% agreeable to both parties and that ratifying it would be no problem to either of them. If that is the case, where is this ` dead-cert, no-strings-attached, no-trust-required' proposal? It doesn't so far exist and I am sure that if anyone can come up with one before 31/10/19 they will be hailed a hero.
Flipping heck you are hard work. That is because the draft withdrawal agreement that was put forward contained clauses that aren’t agreeable. No point signing something that is not agreeable and just trust that it will never be used.
Have you ever contracted for something? This really isn’t rocket science.
 

CommonSense

Active Member
This is my personal view of how things stand in the run up to the 2019 General Election which is largely a battle between the Conservatives and The Rest.

1 Scotland

It seems unlikely in Scotland that many people are going to change their Brexit minds. But prior to the Brexit referendum, Scotland was almost wholly SNP whereas later in the 2017 general election the SNP lost seats to the main parties. Could it be that some Scots are fed up with calls for another independence referendum? While the Scots may be Remainers, it can not be taken that they are all SNP supporters so there may be room here for SNP losses but only gains to the Conservatives will make a difference.

2 Brexit Party

The appeal of the Brexit party will be to Leavers who are actively seeking a No Deal Brexit, something which opinion says is very little favoured. The Brexit party’s decision not to contest currently Conservative seats as a concession to them seems to indicate that they are not wholly behind themselves which is not a very good endorsement of themselves. I put this down to Nigel Farage who reminds me of Clint Eastwood’s `High Plains Drifter’ -he’s very sure of himself, `paints the town red' and comes and goes to suit himself only.

Considering the Labour seats the Brexit party is contesting, some will be safe and some marginal. Taking the traditional, safe Labour areas of the North East and South Wales, while the Labour party is strongly pro-EU, I ask myself why then did these areas vote to Leave the EU? Could it be they made an ill-informed, ill-considered decision? If the answer is no then shouldn’t they now be voting Conservative (on Brexit issue at least)?

Remember that the First-Past-The- Post election system disproportionally disadvantages small parties and for the previous UKIP (now Brexit party) 10% total vote was worth only 1 seat -wasted votes. But votes for the Brexit party may affect the results in marginal Labour seats but while this could favour the Conservatives it could do the opposite and disadvantage them.

3 The Green Party

The Green party and issues are much to the fore recently, particularly with young voters. However regarding the urgent aspect of carbon dioxide emissions I would say that a vote for the Green party is a wasted vote. Looking online at some of the facts of carbon dioxide emissions for 2017, the emissions attributed to the UK constitute about only 1% of the total and they have been dropping to this level over recent decades. The top 5 emitters are China 27.2%, USA 14.6%, India 6.8%, Russia 4.7% and Japan 3.3%. If you look at emissions per capita, the UK is 69th on the list compared to USA 17th, Russia 24th, Japan 32nd, China 44th, India 139th. Whatever we in the UK do to reduce our emissions is going to make little difference on its own. We can ask them, but can we expect the people of China and India, developing countries, to reduce their emissions? And if you appeal to the USA among the worst offenders, their President denies global warming exists despite the signs, including wild fires in their own affluent California. No, governmentally there is little we can do but individually (and that is what it really boils down to) people in places like the USA can do exactly the same things to combat global warming as individuals in the UK.

4 Re-run of the 2016 Brexit Referendum

This general election is bound to have a strong element of re-running the Brexit referendum. The 2016 referendum was conducted in 381 Voting Areas of which 270 voted to Leave and 129 voted Remain. Estimates have been done on the results by Constituencies and geographically there is a good correlation between these and the Voting Areas. Inspection of voting maps shows the following:

A In Scotland and Greater London the vote was decidedly to Remain. Comments regarding Scotland in my point 1. In Greater London in 2017 the Conservatives lost seats to Labour and Liberal Democrats and so the Conservatives’ job this time round is not only to persuade Remainers to change to Conservative Leavers but to retain existing Conservative seats as well.

B In Northern Ireland there was an East/West Leave/Remain split corresponding generally to Unionist/Nationalist demography.

C Most of the populated areas of Wales voted to Leave apart from in the very South East. Comments regarding South Wales and North East England in my point 2.

D In England, there were several `island’ areas which voted to Remain. Most significantly though there is a large, roughly triangular area in the South of England bounded by Gloucester, Cambridge and Brighton where the results were Remain or borderline Leave and in my opinion it is here that the result of the election will be decided. If you look at this area on a Constituency map for 2017 it is largely Conservative and comprises, electorally speaking, what I call `thinking voters’ (no disrespect to voters elsewhere). Here, some Remainers and Leavers who change their minds to Remain might decide to vote other than Conservative. On the other hand some Labour/LibDem Leavers might vote Conservative. Which will have the bigger effect?

5 Other Election Issues

Looking at the Labour and Conservative manifestos I find a stark contrast. The Conservative manifesto is brief, simple and believable. The Labour manifesto is extended and difficult to take in and I am inclined to believe it is not workable, attractive as some of the policies seem. However, with the increased focus there has been on politics recently, there may be more interest from young, idealistic people in voting Labour or Liberal Democrat which will not help the Conservatives
 

The latest video from AVForums

Podcast: Panasonic JZ2000 Final Thoughts - TV Calibration: Should you? And More...
Subscribe to our YouTube channel

Full fat HDMI teeshirts

Support AVForums with Patreon

Top Bottom