Donate SIGN UP

No Deal, Now It's "highly Likely"........

Avatar Image
ToraToraTora | 14:21 Thu 04th Apr 2019 | News
47 Answers
The EU appears to be settling for no deal:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-47815599
"But ultimately it is the EU which decides whether to grant an extension. European Commission Vice-President Jyrki Katainen said a no-deal Brexit was "highly likely" despite Parliament proceeding with legislation to prevent it." - I will be eternally grateful to the EU if they do not allow further dithering.
Gravatar

Answers

21 to 40 of 47rss feed

First Previous 1 2 3 Next Last

Avatar Image
Haha I find it similarly "ironic" that the Remainiacs were banking on the EUSSR stymying Brexit for them by being intransigent and are now looking at the prospect of the very same EUSSR dashing their plans due to their own silly games. Hi Ronnie. :))
14:57 Thu 04th Apr 2019
ZM,//What's happened to the cross party group trying to make a no-deal illegal? //
It was passed by one vote in the commons and is now with the Lords for debate later today.
3T - why is he still in post then?!
Question Author
you tell me ag, all I'm saying is that historically experts have turned out be wrong. Even if he's right it's the price of freedom. We've got through tougher times that these, we will again.
Thankyou, danny. Does this have a bearing on it (a no deal exit) being 'highly likely' then?
Question Author
yeah but's complete bowlocks danny, you can't legislate against the default, you have to put something in it's way. Simply declaring the cliff edge illegal will not stop you falling over it. Anyway if the EU do not grant and extension then we either have no deal or no brexit, both of which are better than the "deals" being discussed.
Suggesting that the threat of waking away from negotiations was a lever with the EU always struck me as bizarre. It’s not and never has been that sort of negotiation: we aren’t “Buying our Brexit” from one of a number of suppliers. We are basically heading out the door one way or another and there is only one door.
It’s like suggesting that the threat of jumping out of the plane without one is going to give us a better deal with the pilot on parachutes..
TTT, The motion was to instruct the PM to ask for a further extension past the exit date, This bill was passed and is with the Lords for ratification.
Yes, I noticed that poll, pixie. I'm surprised because it's definitely the first in a while that has seen No Deal have such a lead, and disappointed because -- obviously -- I fundamentally reject the idea that "No Deal" can be anything other than a complete disaster. It doesn't even end anything, anyway. At best it's a small interruption in the natural process of coming to an arrangement with the EU.
Question Author
great, how does that make no deal illegal?
so the PM has to ask for a further extension, fair enough, doesn't mean it will be given and from the noises emanating from over the channel I'd say the EUSSR has settled for no deal, we should too and get on with preparations.
TTT the extension(if granted) will be long enough to extend past the exit dates, so exiting with no deal will not happen.







Question Author
indeed danny, for now.
I've never read so much rubbish in all my life Ich.

Guess you are in charge of NHS procurement - it would explain the mess it's in.

And for gawds sake dont take up poker.
Question Author
PMSL YMB!
So it's not 'highly likely' then, because the illegality issue may prevent it?
Question Author
as far as I can tell Mrs Balls' bill is to force the PM to ask for an extension. I don't see how you can legislate to make the default illegal and even if you could, if no extension is granted then we dop out anyway. How does the law work when 2 laws are contradictory?
It's not contradictory, tho. It's law we will exit, but not law that we will exit with no deal (as I understand it).
From where I am sitting ymb that’s exactly what it’s like :-)
Question Author
I still don't see how you can make no deal illegal. if the EU do not agree to an extension then if remaining is illegal and also no deal is illegal that means we'd have to stay but that is illegal so we have to leave but that is also illegal so we are locked in limbo by two conflicting laws.
Yes I don’t think yesterday’s law makes leaving with no deal “illegal” as such but it makes it illegal for the PM not to ask for an extension beyond April 12.
What is the good old English Democrats managed to persuade a judge that we actually left the EU last week. Then there’ll be mass confiscations of pork pies and cheddar cheese from Brits abroad etc etc :-)
//In that marathon cabinet meeting yesterday there was a lengthy presentation regarding the no-deal scenario and the report from the highest ranking civil servant did not make good reading.

He would know,wouldn't he?//

No he wouldn’t, Aggy, for the simple reason that nobody does. Couple that to the fact that despite its alleged independence, the Civil Service is ardently, almost to the point of mania, in favour of Remaining and you must take such information with a large dose of salt.

//3T - why is he still in post then?!//

Because he was appointed by a government who are similarly inclined and any dire predictions he can conjure up are grist to their mill.

Business thrives despite all interferences. Regardless of the forecasts that the world will come to an end as a result of No Deal it will not. There may be short term inconveniences caused by political dogma but business will adapt and thrive. It always does. I have suggested that a “Deal” amounts to permission to leave (without too much trouble). I would go further than that – I believe it is applying duress to the UK to agree to terms which to nobody in their right mind would acquiesce "in order to avoid any bovver we might cause for you". Any deal concocted by the EU will be to the EU’s advantage and the UK’s disadvantage. It will be designed to prevent the UK from competing in world markets on more favourable terms than EU member states can. That’s the whole point of the Customs Union (and a principle reason why Brexit is so necessary). But all we are doing here is regurgitating the arguments made prior to the referendum because it was made quite clear to everybody what leaving would mean.

///ZM,//What's happened to the cross party group trying to make a no-deal illegal? //
It was passed by one vote in the commons and is now with the Lords for debate later today.///

The vote passed yesterday does not make No Deal illegal, per se. It forces the Prime Minister to ask the EU for an extension to A50. If the extension is not granted we either leave with No Deal (because nothing else is on offer unless the PM’s appalling agreement succeeds at a fourth airing) or we must revoke A50. The EU knows this (which may help ikky understand why threatening to walk away is by no means “bizarre”and should always have been an option) and I know where my money is.

21 to 40 of 47rss feed

First Previous 1 2 3 Next Last

Do you know the answer?

No Deal, Now It's "highly Likely"........

Answer Question >>

Related Questions

Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.