Britain leaving the European Union.


It’s interesting to watch a Right Wing propaganda machine in action instantaneously. There was a big defeat for No Deal Brexit tonight, but you’d hardly sense that from the Telegraph and the Various Wingnuts. They quickly try to move the story along to “the Gang of Four”


This is correct. A large cohort of British consumers would be happy enough to eat Pedigree Chum.
I’ve even been told this by UK supermarket buyers.


Yep, expecting to see them branded as traitors on social media even if not the MSM. Also Jacob Rees Mogg tonight hoohaahed the no-deal rejection vote. He said a Commons vote is not legally binding, and the only binding legislation says that they are exiting on 29th. Don’t know how that gels with something I’ve heard him say on another occasion, that parliament is sovereign in the UK. And I certainly don’t know how he squares it with demanding the referendum vote be respected when that was merely advisory.


I feel like I need a stiff drink before saying this, but it’s probable too early to start drinking…

Mogg is right…

Now I feel really violated and dirty for saying that.

Yesterday’s vote, while all great drama and great fun was meaningless and changes nothing. The only consequence to yesterday’s vote is to shut up May. She can no longer go around saying things like ‘No deal is better than a bad deal’, if she does she can be found in contempt of Parliament yet again. Yesterday’s vote tells the executive that they are not allowed to negotiate a ‘no deal’ with the EU and they must do everything in their power to negotiate something other than ‘no deal’. They are no longer allowed to say out loud that they want a ‘no deal’.

It doesn’t change the options that are on the table.

  1. Crash out.
  2. Extend A50,
  3. Repeal A50 and stay in the EU.

Options two and three require the UK parliament to repeal the European withdrawal Act, which was passed last summer, in the next two weeks.

Does anyone really think that Parliament will publish a Bill, have it bounce between the two houses and signed by the Queen to repeal, or edit, the Withdrawal act in the next 10 days?


Ah here, leave it out. We haven’t entered a Wingnut parallel universe. The only reason we got a second vote this week is because May agreed to also offer a vote rejecting No Deal. She can’t then ignore it. I agree it seemed like she wanted to last night. But she can’t. She hates it but she can’t ignore it.


The thing to remember with the Wingnuts is that they’re still using the rhetorical tactics that won them the referendum, namely “True Lies” and Total Confidence

I heard Mogg on the BBC News 24 yesterday or the day before getting a typical easy interview:
Interviewer - ’ what about delays at ports in the event of no deal ?’
Mogg - ‘Do you know how long it takes goods from outside the EU to pass customs in the port of Dover ?..6 seconds !’

Now, this is true. But its also a lie. Because the reason goods take 6 seconds, if they do, is that the UK as par’t of the EU’s trade deals. And the amount of non trade agreement trade jumps to 100% in the event of a No deal. So its a lie.

Watch the DUP…that’s who counts now. If they switch sides, Afghan tribal warlord-style, then that’s the game changer.


Firstly, why can’t she just ignore it? What happens if the government just ignores everything that happened yesterday? The government has already been found in contempt of Parliament, what happened then? *Ms May, we are serious this time, if you don’t rule out ‘no deal’ we are going to find you in contempt of Parliament yet again. *

Secondly, and more importantly, what legal power does May and or the Government have? They can’t force the EU to accept a deal; they can’t force Parliament to accept a deal; Parliament can’t be forced to repeal the Withdrawal act; A50 can’t be extended without Parliament changing the law and unanimity from the rest of EU; A50 can’t be withdrawn without Parliament changing the law authorizing it.

The UK Parliament and government have spent the last few years ruling out options and making it as hard as possible to open up new options. Now they have ruled out all options and there is no time left to give themselves a way out of the mess.


She proposed the vote ruling out No Deal herself. She got her second vote because of it. It’s not a matter of contempt. She stood up and said ‘I will give Parliament a chance to reject No Deal’. I could get Hansard out to check that. You can ignore other people’s gambits. You can’t ignore your own gambit ! :smiley:


Because Moggy says Parliament is sovereign. That’s the point and where he’s wrong. If he’s not wrong now, he was wrong before. He is a fool and a blaggard who will say whatever suits his position. He’s not unusual in that, but it appears he stands to financially benefit from a hard Brexit (or at least it is opaque). Conflict of interest much? Yes.

He has already suggested suspending Parliament to ensure a no deal Brexit. Democracy much? No, not really.

If you can bear to watch him; here he is explaining the privileges of the House of Commons:

You can see in Hansard the same point he made over and over: … 76931EDFA3

To Dominic Raab about the first meaningful vote last year some time:

Last nights vote on no No Deal ever was a meaningful vote and was passed. No Deal is off the table, per Moggy-logic.

edit: crossed with Blamegame saying pretty much the same thing :slight_smile:


On the extension, some thoughts from around Europe:
Including a hard enough line from Italy…

For those EU governments looking to aid national businesses, a No Deal Brexit is a godsend :wink:


Don’t get me wrong. I think Mogg is a lying sack of shit. But on that one point, that yesterday’s vote is largely meaningless, I can’t see why he is wrong.

I can not find any legal options to get out of the mess that the UK government has got itself into. The Government is bound by laws. There are things it can do and things it can not do. May can not simply declare that A50 is being delayed or repealed, a simple vote in the house isn’t enough because it has been written into UK law by the European Withdrawal Act.

Any way out of this requires primary legislation to be passed to open doors. In principle A50 can be extended easily enough. It requires Primary Legislation to be passed by the Houses in the UK Parliament though. This needs to be done in the next two weeks.

I can foresee a scenario that there could be a bit of a fudge to extend things by a few days. This scenario would only be plausible if the Government writes a bill to extend A50 and is unanimously supported by Cabinet to delay A50. Maybe then a grace period of days could be granted on the Primary Legislation thing. I can thought see many ways in which Mogg and his mates could frustrate this fudge.

What am I missing?

Months ago I put a bet on paddypower that there would be no extension. I’m feeling more and more confident that I’ll get that €50.

I just can’t see any way out of this that isn’t blocked by obstacles that take months to move. Months which are not available.


Leaving aside the economic aspect for a moment, in pure political terms which of those three options is most in the institutional EU’s interest at this point?

Option a)

(i) A March 29th crash out followed by post-Brexit economic crisis and potential political unrest in Ireland could be spun in a very positive manner with a view to safeguarding the EU’s longer-term future.


(ii) A March 29th crash out followed by negligible levels of negative fallout could damage the EU irreparably.

Option b)

As of now, extending for no good reason simply postpones one of the above (see (a)). It would also, presumably, ensure UK participation in the EU elections due to be held in June…which would inevitably become a de facto referendum on EU membership. Characters such as Farage and Tommy Robinson would no doubt be to the fore in any such campaign. This would be a gamble that could backfire and add to the number of anti-EU nationalists/populists sitting in the EU Parliament.

Option c)

Repeal A50 and stay in the EU. Are the chances of civil unrest more, less or the same as the crash-out options? Is there potential for a Treaty of Versaille effect (for want of a better term) and corresponding rise in extreme English nationalism should the referendum result be overturned? Perhaps Catbear or someone else in the UK could answer that. But Ive already today seen some Brexiteer MP invoking the judgment of God and his terminally ill uncle on the broader political class who, in his view, are refusing to act in accordance with democratic principles and adhere to the result of the Referendum on the basis of their hatred and disdain for those who voted the ‘wrong’ way on Brexit etc.

In political terms, perhaps its now more in the interest of the intitutional EU to cut the UK loose and hope that they simply cant swim.

The economic arguments will obviously differ but as of now it would appear to be a political problem that requires a political solution.


I presume this is why the vote on extending A50 is taking place tonight, before any discussion of what the extension would be used for. That discussion can take place while the legislation trundles through the rest of the process. Don’t forget there’s another step beyond passing the UK legislation – the EU has to accept it with unanimity of the other 27 member states. So the UK bit needs to happen in one week, not two. I’ve no doubt that can be made to happen if needs be. The much harder bit is coming up with reasons why the EU should take it seriously. We can guess in advance it’ll be a total fudge but it has to be something. Are MPs capable of doing that, especially with the DUP and Mogglodytes trying to frustrate it?


Good post.

Ireland’s best interests do not align with the EU on some of those options. We don’t want the UK as a key market and ally to see unrest or suffer economically, we don’t want to see the rise of English nationalism and we don’t want to see Ireland get blamed in the UK for blocking their unshackled exit from the EU.

There is also another possibility - May will rerun her WA vote next Wednesday for the third time, it might actually pass depending on what the DUP and other key Brexiteers will strategically do in the light of their remaining options, and the British government will use the short extension being requested to pass the necessary legislation.

All in all there is likely to be another fudge and a long extension where May steps down and a new Conservative leader is found somewhere who can drive a consensus with Labour on a soft Brexit. Or a UK general election is called during the extension although this may not produce a clear result and way forward either. The time required to pass the necessary legislation in all scenarios to avoid a no deal exit is still worrying though. No deal blocking motions passed in the HOC are interesting but not law.


From what I’ve heard on local radio in North England today both Tories and Labour will want to avoid an election if Brexit is postponed. Both Tories and Labour would be fighting a rearguard action against Ukip and all the other malcontents so maybe a few Labour MPs might cave to support Mays withdrawal.


So Labour vote against a second referendum having previous said they’d vote a people’s vote. Is this as naked party politics as it seems or am I missing something?


The short answer is yes, but there is an Election coming soon and Labour have to make sure they’re not outflanked by right-wing brexiteers.
Whatever your feelings about Brexit a right-wing JRM type neo-liberal/Tatcherite lead Brexit Britain would be a disaster for the British working class, the Labour movement and the progressive things it has done for Britain. If I was Corbyn this would be my nightmare and the thing that must be fought.
A Labour lead Brexit Britain would be outside the Neo-liberal EU and you’d no longer have to comply with the rules about state aid and not nationalising infrastructure, which is why it’s attractive to Corbyn.


I’m trying to follow this as much as possible but it’s just getting harder. Last night the Brexit Secretary (Barclay) closed a debate on the motion to request an extension by calling on the house to back the government’s motion. Then, minutes later, he voted against it. Against the government. Against the motion on extending Brexit. His motion.


Meanwhile, former Brexit Secretary David Davis voted with the government - despite having previously walked out because he wanted a hard(er) Brexit than the Prime Minister.

And a motion for a second referendum was rejected by people who want a second referendum. The People’s Vote campaign said yesterday wasn’t the time to push this - but it might be next week. :open_mouth:

Back in the real world, I just invoiced someone in the UK - which is rare for me. Reverse VAT applies under EU directive something something. I asked them what would happen post-Brexit from a VAT perspective. They don’t know but they think they are leaving in two weeks. Even though, if they had been paying attention to the new, they’d know they almost definitely are not.


Surely the rise of the right-wing such as UKIP would help Labour as it would more naturally eat into the Tory vote?


Talking to some people on the ground in the UK not many seem impressed with Labour on Brexit, or Labour under Corbyn in general so there could be a leakage of votes to a new Brexit party from that source also. Plenty of anger about with their politicians in general.