Off Topic UK / EU Future

The EU have made it clear that an extension is only possible with the agreement of all 27 countries. This could only be in exceptional circumstances such as to allow time for a general election or a second referendum.

 

A huge step there for you SH to accept that the PM might try to extend article 50. I would disagree that it is to do with seeing off the opposition, but more to do with the time she has wasted. Now we have got you that far, which means we would not leave the EU at the end of March, what changes to the current agreement would you accept? Quite interesting that the SS is now actually talking about extending it. This is clearly becoming an option for the government.

 

They probably don't want UKIP to join the hordes of new anti EU far right-wingers who will dominate the European elections in May.

 

May has very few options left when her deal is rejected so no surprise at all that she may try for more time. I would rather we left on Freedom Day on no deal terms unless a proper deal can be negotiated in time.

 

There may be trouble ahead for the EU post Brexit - interesting read.

Populist plan for 2019 election puts EU in crosshairs – POLITICOhttps://www.politico.eu/article/populist-plan-for-2019-election-puts-eu-in-cross-hairs/

 

I would just point out that the reasons for May losing her majority were the ones you gave, and not mine. Although they may have contributed to it, there was far more to it than that. However that is in the past, and she has been fighting a losing battle ever since.

Cologne is right in saying that to extend article 50 would require all 27 countries to agree. It is not a decision that the EU can take. However it has been confirmed that the UK can withdraw article 50 without approval. Seeing as she has been left with "very few options" should she go for a solution she might not get, or one that she clearly can? Time for the Brexiteers to stop being ideologues and face up to the fact that they can choose between going cap in hand and asking for more time, or calling the whole thing off.

 

Great to see that the UK shambles over Brexit has turned off so many voters from following that route. There was a large swing in favour of the EU after the UK vote.

 

To be honest I am surprised the option for extension is still on the table as the EU would have to move bloody quickly to get it through. Given issues some member states have it's not a racing certainty that they'll all agree.
I'm still of the view she will get this through next week.

 

If you think she will get this through, would you place money on it? Listening to MPs in the Commons today I would have said there was very little chance. What could she offer to Moggy and his bunch to placate them enough to get them to change their minds? I could see no change of view from any speaker since the debate was halted in December.

 

I still think more than a few labour and lib Dems will have a change of heart. There isn't a better deal to be negotiated with the EU. I'd definitely have money on it - always back the outsider!

 

mmm.... interesting...… She is certainly been playing a long game...…. The maths don't seem to add up though according to the pundits. Given that parliament, and good on them, have forced through the amendment I would see that as playing into the hands of labour MPS who would like to force an election...

 

What is clear the make up of the new European Parliament will be much more eurosceptic and against central control. Macron and other federalists will be stopped in their tracks by the surge in support for far right wingers and nationalists. I would like to claim the new direction is due to the lead taken by the UK with Brexit but really Merkel's open door policy is clearly the main factor.

 

Certainly Corbyn's policy is clear on forcing an election (even though his policy is not clear on much else). If May's vote fails then she then has 3 days to produce a plan B - also a dilemma for Labour - do they wait the 3 days before initiating a vote of no confidence, or do it immediately ? The success of such an initiative is dependent on those 20 rebel Tories - will they vote against the government on this as well, if faced with a hard Brexit as the only alternative ? If there is a general election it will not be fought on those bread and butter issues such as the NHS, which should be the case, but will only be a Brexit dominated thing (much as Labour would like to get onto other themes). The whole thing could be very volatile, and could lead to another inconclusive result. However, the odds would favour a Labour led coalition emerging (whatever the polls now say) - which means that Corbyn would be reliant on the support of parties which favour a second referendum. Which can only lead to one result. What changes could a Labour led coalition make to this country ? Together with parties which favour PR and combined with Labour's decentralization plans. Britain could, ironically, end up with a political structure similar to those in Europe as a result of all this ! Also the Tories have used up their vote of no confidence in their leader - and so they would be stuck with TM for such a snap election. Unless she resigns.

 

Did you bet on Burton Albion

 

It would appear from some informed insiders, that there is a great deal of cross party cooperation going on, which is giving the Tory whips a major headache, as they don't know what the next amendment will be. Clearly this excludes the leadership of both parties. With the PMs power ebbing away, and the leader of the Opposition unwilling to have a policy apart from calling for an election, there is a vacuum in the government, and once the seal is broken the vacuum will be filled by others. We have seen in recent days the most loyal of Tory MPs breaking a lifetime of habit to defeat the government, but I am sure they would prefer there not to be a vote of no confidence. The Commons reflects the mood of the nation, one where there is no agreement on the way forward from this unholy mess.

 

If Corbyn actually gets an election then he will be forced into having a policy on Brexit. He would much rather fight a campaign on other themes, but this will not be possible. Up to now his official policy on Brexit has been to deliver on the referendum result and strike a deal with the EU. whereby we lose none of our existing conditions, a combination which even the most stupid voter knows to be impossible. Sitting on the fence will not be possible in an election campaign.

 

Corbyn might call for an election, but his chances of getting one from my viewpoint are slim. He has said in the speech given today that he will only call for one when he thinks he can win a vote in the Commons, which might be never. I sometimes wonder if he actually wants one. If he did win with any sort of majority, the first things he would have to do would be go to the EU and request that article 50 was put on hold. He might or not have this granted, but then he would be in a bit of a pickle. His policy if you can find it seems to be that we stay in the CU, although he wants it to be slightly different, workers rights stay exactly as they are now, and renegotiate the agreement that May has come up with. There may be more, but I struggle to find it. I cannot imagine that after all the painful months of work put in at the EU they would even consider starting again. The best I think he could get would be either something along the Norway model, or an associate type of membership, but almost exactly what we have now, without the voting rights. His policy such as it is is so similar to the existing arrangement, I cannot see why he still cannot admit that Labour could go into this imaginary election on a remain ticket. It seems to me that he has boxed himself into a corner in the same way as the PM. She has to do something, he still seems to think that his fence is safer.

 

What we have now is a share buying opportunity if you have some spare cash.

 

An election may not be necessary Frenchie. If the government of the day is incapable of getting a majority on a day to day working basis then there is a constitutional pretext for the monarch to ask the leader of the opposition if he/she can.

 

I don't think I will hold my breath for that one cologne.