BuckinghamshireBoy

No worries, I had guessed as much.

Indeed, the DUP are utter toads on this whole deal, Maybot made a huge mistake getting this lot 'on board'.

dbd33

She's made a lot of mistakes and underestimating the intransigence of the DUP was one of them but I don't see that the mess would be greatly different had she not made those mistakes. Cameron is the villain of this piece.

BuckinghamshireBoy

Indeed.

Almost Canadian

I don't understand such logic. Either Brexit is not going to happen, or there is going to be a no deal fall off the cliff, isn't there. How is a very soft Brexit going to happen in the time available, when the EU have made it clear the deal that was voted on yesterday is the "best the UK can get"?

The various factions don't appear to be able to agree upon anything that can be voted on, so no one "slice" is going to be big enough.

Oakvillian

May has asked for "meaningful discussions" in cross-party talks, starting this evening. Every other significant player - spokespeople or leaders from Labour, the LIb Dems, SNP, Plaid Cymru and others - have all said that the first item in any negotiation will need to be that the "no deal" exit comes off the table as an option. The Government has apparently insisted that that will not happen. So don't expect any meaningful negotiations.

May has no way forward except to "delay" the provisions of Article 50, and ultimately, I suspect, to cave to pressure for a second referendum. Parliament has already agreed that it will have the final say on any exit plan; Parliament has also already agreed that a No Deal exit is not acceptable.

The EU has absolutely no incentive whatsoever to reopen negotiations: they've offered their deal, which has been rejected by the UK Parliament, so the next move is absolutely for the UK to make.

In all of this I can't help see the wonderful irony that this is a perfect example of the sovereignty of Britain's Parliament, which is what so many Brexiteers bleated on about. Not the sovereignty of the Government, nor of the nebulous "will of the people," but of Parliament. Parliament is exercising that sovereignty in an inexorable but glacial movement towards abandoning the whole notion of Brexit. And the Brexiteers, hoist on their own petard, suddenly don't like it.

A plague on all their houses, say I. Brexit was a ridiculous notion from the first, poorly thought through, sold on a fabric of lies and misrepresentations, presented by a collection of individuals and organizations who (it is quite clear with the benefit of hindsight) never for one moment had the best interests of the country in mind. Much the best option now is to forget the whole idea, apologize to the nation for causing so much upheaval, and carry on as before safe in the knowledge that Parliamentary sovereignty has never actually been in any doubt at all.

One further irony, of course, is that May won the confidence vote by almost the same 52:48 margin as the 2016 referendum result. Take from that what you will...

Shard

It's not "legally" possible at the moment, but we are in new territory. Apart from the extreme Brexiters there seems to be a consensus in Parliament and the EU that a No Deal (cliff edge) is chaos and can't be allowed to happen; on the other hand Remain is a long shot and which can't be permitted without a public mandate (second vote). In that case all sides are incentvised to re-think the Brexit terms, for example remaining in the Customs Union. If the UK signals a substantive shift in the terms of Brexit, it's likely the A50 can be extended to permit that negotiation.

Shard

Spot on. Not goning to happen, unfortunately. Too many loons have been unleashed.

I noticed the further irony too.

dbd33

I now think "no deal" is the most likely outcome. I expect a postponement. I think an election and another referendum to be possible and that neither would resolve the muddle; a slightly different selection of Tories would be elected and the referendum would again be inconclusive. Eventually the UK will run out of postponements, not be able to come up with a better deal than May's, and will drift out of the EU.

Right now, electing Trump looks less stupid than voting for Brexit but, of course, he still has a thumb on the "End World" button.

Shard

Well, anything can happen, but No Deal would be detrimental for the EU too, so they are incentvised to extend the negotiation. I think if a soft Brexit cannot be hammered out then Parliament is more likely to opt for the politically uncomfortable No Brexit than the economic catastrophe of No Deal. If you look at the chief proponents of No Deal (and there are very few) they all seem to be snake oil types, there are very few qualified economists or business leaders advocating No Deal.

dbd33

There are very few qualified economists or business leaders advocating Brexit at all. The whole idea is ridiculous. Given that, it's a matter of how long can Parliament drag out the "not yet Brexit"? I'd guess maybe five years but that's not long enough to come to a consensus in Parliament so I think it has to end in "no deal".

Shard

Not understanding the logic here. Although UK triggered A50 it can rescind the A50 process of it's own volition. The only impediment appears to be the moral (not legal) obligation to uphold the 2016 referendum result.

dbd33

Oh, not drag it out against a legal constraint, drag it out against bickering.

Shard

By "no deal" do you mean no Brexit at all (as Oakvillian was suggesting)?

dbd33

No, I mean leaving the EU and adopted WTO trading rules. I mean the rest of the EU throwing their hands up and saying "piss off then".

Shard

Ok. But, I I think if it came to that Parliament would force a second referendum as last ditch effort to avoid the cliff. That being said there may well be enough "just get on with it" folk to hasten the jump.