10 Days To Brexit – Maybe

In theory (and in current law) in 10 days Britain exits the EU.
Unless, of course, it doesn’t.

Sky News is busy talking to political types who are pushing the notion of extending the deadline. Then some who are pointing out that it’s a bit daft to continue doing whatever it is they’ve been doing for 2 years of doing nothing… The one on now (Peter Bone, MP) is pushing the idea of a “Managed No Deal” exit. What the? So the UK would “leave” on the 29th, but “nothing would change” for some period of time while they “managed the exit”? If nothing changes, isn’t that the same as being “in”?

Supposedly the request to the EU for an extension will return to the UK just 4 days before the 29th. (So Monday the 25th?) Not much time to react to whatever the EU does or doesn’t do.

Then the Speaker has said that he will not allow another vote on T. May’s “deal” if it is substantially the same as the last time (times?). That’s gonna put a wrench in the “run out the clock” strategy.

I find it funny how frantic folks are being over the notion of a “no deal” joining the rest of the world. One reporter is saying that there are a bunch of drugs now on the “hard to get” list “due to Brexit” (that hasn’t happened yet…) Do they think drugs and food are not available in the rest of the world? That ONLY the EU has medicines, markets for products, cars to sell, food? The absolute LACK of any mention at all of New Zealand lamb, Australian Wheat, Canadian beef, and both Indian and US medicine producers is just stunning.

Were you to believe the news, once the UK leaves the EU it will be standing all alone on a barren island cut off from all civilization and with no access to industrial goods or farm products. Isolated. Alone. Slowly dying. Yet the rest of the world is full of German cars, French wine, Italian shoes and more. Somehow we “get by”…

I really wonder if folks are that disconnected from reality.

If you are really lucky, Hungary or Italy or Poland or … will refuse to extend Article 50 and the Speaker will refuse to alow a re-vote (the 3rd time now?) on T. May’s “deal” and in 10 days the UK will rejoin the rest of the world as a free nation in charge of their own fate.

If you are very UN-lucky, you will get another year of fence sitting, nattering, remoaning, bickering, indecision, and backbiting while more “nothing” happens… and we’ll get to do this all over again.

Because “this time will be different!”? or because it felt so good the first time? or what? I’m just not seeing the reason.

There are 2 choices: IN. OUT. The people picked one, “out”. The Elite want “in”, but that is political suicide. Avoiding the decision to “pick one” is not going to make anything better. One side will win and the other lose. Pick one. Please. Then pull out the arrow and patch up the wound and “move on”.

Subscribe to feed

About E.M.Smith

A technical managerial sort interested in things from Stonehenge to computer science. My present "hot buttons' are the mythology of Climate Change and ancient metrology; but things change...
This entry was posted in Political Current Events and tagged , . Bookmark the permalink.

36 Responses to 10 Days To Brexit – Maybe

  1. oldbrew says:

    The Cabinet is at war over Brexit. So is Parliament, with various factions. No majority for anything positive i.e. actual Brexit, only for things they don’t like the sound of.

    Many of them don’t want to respect the result of the referendum. It’s grim stuff.

  2. Graeme No.3 says:

    Old time British planning, bumbling your way through.

  3. YMMV says:

    Britain has made one trade deal: Norway and Iceland. At least 39 more to go. They may have one with Switzerland too, and working on South Africa and Israel. So maybe they are doing something behind the scenes. You wouldn’t know it from the BBC. uk.reuters.com does cover it.

  4. Bill in Oz says:

    Looks like a veto by one of the 27 EU members to an extension is the only way of salvation for the UK. Perhaps Italy or Hungary or Poland will do a veto out of pure compassion ? Or out of a desire to see what really happens if Brexit happens ? With a view to seeing their own possible futures ?

  5. London Calling says:

    Please just make it end – we’ve all had more than enough. No-one much cares now how the farce ends, just that it does, and quickly.
    Even if our wonderful MPs eventually vote for Ms. May’s “deal” it’s not actually a deal – we’ve not negotiated anything at all to do with trade – there are years more of this to come.
    Where’s Mr. Fawkes when you need him?

  6. A C Osborn says:

    As a group the UK MPs are the most disengenious, lying cheating MPs in the world.
    They have gone against the Referendum result, their Constituency results, their own Decision to support Brexit, their own Party Election Manifestos upon which they were re-elected.
    I am absolutely livid and disgusted at their behaviour.
    Some on here may remember I predicted this would happen, the MPs and T May in particular never intended to honour and implement the will of the people.
    This is also typical EU tactics where any kind of sovereignty is concerned.
    I knew it would be bad but I am still shocked at how many MPs just outright lied about the single most important act for 50 years.
    Traitors just about sums them up.

  7. Fred Streeter says:

    Ah! Mr. Fawkes. The only man who went to Westminster to keep his promise.

  8. richard verney says:

    What is going on in the UK, is the same as that going on in the States.

    In the States, there is a soft coup trying to overthrow a duly elected President. In the UK, there is a soft coup trying to overthrow the results of the outcome of a referendum in which Politicians agreed that the people would decide whether they remained in or left the EU.

    On both sides of the Pond, the rule of law is being undermined, and democracy is being shredded and left in tatters.

    There is a war going on between we, the people being governed, and those that govern us. Not only are those that are elected and supposed to represent us and execute the will of the people, against us (we the people being governed), there is also an unelected Deep State and 5th column also working against us.

    Who wins this battle will determine the course of the 21st Century, or at least the course and direction of the next 30 or 40 years of this century.

  9. jim2 says:

    The Queen could man up and suspend Parliament. She could lend a hand to her people. If she doesn’t, what good is she anyway?

  10. A C Osborn says:

    jim2, yes she should, be she has kept out of politics completely during the whole of her reign and I can’t see that changing.
    It is amazing that a Sovereign would allow the very sovereignty of the country she rules to be given away to the EU, but it happened and she did nothing.
    There are a lot of very angry people in the UK at the moment, it does not not bode well for the future.

  11. A C Osborn says:

    Richard, you are correct about the similarities between the UK & the US and one of the biggest issues is the MSM lying to support the Government.

  12. beththeserf says:

    It’s world wide, it’s a globalist coup, open borders but not open society or free trade.
    New world order guvuhmint from afar by un-elected technocrats.

    The EU, its Hotel California , tra la la, you can sign in but you can never leave.

  13. E.M.Smith says:


    I quite like the notion of Her Majesty announcing a “Festival Of Independence” for the next week and suspending Parliamentary Proceedings during that time… Give the old girl one last big moment on stage to crown her career and assure her a place in history as the one who returned British Sovereignty…

    The alternative is either a Parliamentary Crisis or a Democratic Crisis, or both.

    Parliamentary rules forbid a re-vote on “the same bill” so The Speaker has said “No!” to a 3rd vote on the T.May abomination. To over-ride that would be a bit of Parliamentary Crisis.

    Tusk has said the EU would only grant a (short) extension if the deal “the ONLY deal” from T.May is voted approved by Parliament.

    So it’s a deadlock.

    Talk of ways to slightly change the “Political Statement” around The (bad) Deal and get a 3rd vote are just asking for a Democratic Crisis as the people get really really steamed at being ignored. Similarly, a vote to rescind Article 50 is a flat out Crisis of Democracy. There is not enough time for a 2nd referendum.

    So somebody has to realize they are stuck in a “No Win Box” and just accept that. Yet nobody is willing to do that (at least not in Parliament, the EU, or T.May)

    At this point, given the position of Mr. Tusk and The Speaker, I’m “quietly hopeful” a simple hard exit can actually happen. Only the complete lack of any sense of Democratic Responsibility by 1/2 +1 of the House Of Commons stands in the way (and might yet break Brexit).

    IMHO it would be an act of uncommon Statesmanship for HRH to announce and end to this farce (before it gets even worse) and the enforcement of the will of the people.

    What I expect, however, is that every possible weaseling abuse of power possible will be explored by the M.Ps, T.May, Tusk, the EU “representatives” and all while the Royals hide off in some castle somewhere worried that actually taking part in their Kingdom might sully their privileges…

    Oh Well…

    I am still hopeful that Italy, Hungary, Poland, heck – maybe even France Or Germany seeing the UK as rival leadership inside the EU; will vote to just not have any extension and kick the UK out for their own reasons.

  14. YMMV says:

    Guy Fawkes lives on as a mask. It would make a nice protest march.

    Sovereignty is gone already, but it’s not so much about political differences as it is about bureaucracy. A clean break on the politics wouldn’t matter much. It’s replacing all the bureaucratic rules that is impossible, just because it’s a huge tangled web, and whatever the rule, someone likes it.

    May’s deal is not really Brexit. It’s not a divorce, more like a trial separation, or a trial not-separation.

  15. rhoda klapp says:

    I don’t know whether this one has come your way. It contains a little Anglo-Saxon language, but it’s entirely appropriate.

  16. beththeserf says:

    On a dark desert highway, cool wind in my hair,
    Warm a smell of collusion rising up in the air,…

    Welcome to the European Union, such a lovely place, such a lovely face….
    Last thing I remember, I was running for the door,
    I had to find the passage back to the place I was before,
    Relax ,’said the night-watchman,
    ‘we are programmed to receive,
    You can check out any time you like
    But you can never leave.’

  17. YMMV says:

    England the once great empire has now become a colony of the EU. The EU does not want them to leave, they like the pounds, and they are no trouble compared to some of their other members. The UK does not want to leave. Sure, they voted to leave once, by a flimsy margin, but now they have cold feet. There are still some leavers, but mostly it’s no or leave in a have-your-cake-and-eat-it-too way. So all the EU has to do is hold out (insisting on all or nothing) and wait for the UK to beg back in. They have to keep insisting on hard deadlines, and I’m sure they’re tired of it all by now. The melodrama is getting boring. Does it end with a bang or a whimper? Or it just keeps on whingeing.

    Like the monarchy has kept its ceremonial role but the functional role is gone. They can keep it around for a while yet, like the Russians kept Lenin.

    Parliamentary Crisis or a Democratic Crisis? It’s not much of a parliamentary crisis. The rule against repeated voting on the same thing make some sense, otherwise it is Russian Roulette — keep trying until you get a hit. But is it real and unavoidable?

    Thus, his devastating “pronunciamento” against the prime minister this week has proved wildly popular on the simple basis that anything which devastates this government must be right. But it is wrong.

    Britain famously lives in the past, but basing parliamentary maneuvers on a 1604 precedent last used in 1920 is comedy gold but not 21st century governance. Even Jacob Rees-Mogg wasn’t around in 1604 (though he may have voted ‘against’ in the 1920 debate).

    It’s simply not true that no matter can be brought back in the same form, in the same parliamentary session. If it were, Mrs. May would not have suffered her second defeat on her Brexit plan.

    Not having a constitution, as Britain doesn’t, has at least the compensation of flexibility, of adapting to new situations. Of not being hidebound. Speaker Bercow just bound Mrs. May’s hide like it was 1599.

    It comes down to which EU. There is the ideal, the Europe which everyone imagined. Democracy, Freedom, one big happy country. Then there is the reality, the EU which turns out to be a monster bureaucracy. The kind of democracy Roger Daltrey sums up like this:
    “Oh, give it up! If you wanna be sign up be be ruled by a f***ing mafia, you do it. Like being governed by FIFA.” (videos online)

    “I’m not anti-Europe, I’m anti-Brussels, but people don’t get the distinction… That’s why I’m so angry about it. I want someone at least answerable to me that I can say: “F**k off, you’re useless!”

  18. Bill in Oz says:

    @YMMV, If you want to stay a European watch your language. The Brussels Eurocrats will never f*ck off when anyone tells them.

    The UK joined the European Common Market in 1972-3It did not join the EU.

    There is a difference; a profound difference !

  19. beththeserf says:

    Promises, promises. Oz Prime Minister, Robert Menzies warned ’em.

  20. A C Osborn says:

    YMMV says: 22 March 2019 at 8:17 am
    Everyone I know who voted leave are now even more adamant that is what we want.
    You need to stop listening to the BBC and MSM project fear about what people think.
    I also know Remainers who have had their eyes opened about how the EU operates and the Propaganda lies the Remain Establishment have used since before the Referendum.
    They need to stop insulting our intelligence and do the jobs they were elected for.

  21. E.M.Smith says:

    @A C Osborn:

    Somewhere along the line it became a trend for elected officials to spend all their time making noise and collecting a check while not actually doing anything in the way of their job. That’s now a global trend. Congress has delegated almost everything but posturing show trials to the bureaucracy or President (executive branch all). Parliament and basically all EU nations to the bureaucracy of Brussels and the EU makers of law (whoever they are… I get lost in that “elect folks who can’t make law other folks do” business…) Hell, our folks don’t even read the law they are making (“Pass it to find out what’s in it” Nancy…)

    So far insulting our intelligence has worked a champ – collecting big money, cushy jobs selling influence, and every few years a bit of fame; all while doing nothing real that could be blamed on them… I suspect that were it not for the big vote to pass Obamacare the game would have continued, but they screwed up and we saw it; thus Trump. (“Wait! YOU passed that? Without READING it?!!! … )

    @Bill in Oz:

    I vaguely remember something about Britain never actually Joining The EU – but have no details. I do know they joined the Common Market, then {something happened} and {some Prime Minister} passed some paper around and Bob’s Yer Uncle – Britain was seated in the EU Parliament but never did vote to join. OTOneH I’d like to better understand that “trick”, OTOtherH I’d like to know if pushing that bit of rope would undo the EU Knot…


    As I understand it, it isn’t so much what is the actual law as it is what people accept as The Law (given what I’ve observed of life…) so if The Speaker can enforce his rule for one more week, that’s as good as God’s Law…. If not, well, Satan has rules too….

    FWIW, my Mum taught me about Guy Fawkes… I grew up in a rural place where burning your “yard waste” was common. So come fall we’d make a pile in the back yard and light it. Just about on the right day…. So Mum told me about “burning down Parliament” (really blowing up) and Guy Fawkes and then about folks lighting fires to “commemorate” the “event” of the thwarting as directed by The Government … then slyly pointed out that it was not required to state if you were commemorating the capture or the attempt…

    I loved my Mum’s Very British sense of humor… and got the distinct impression she was celebrating the attempt ;-) In a “Remember Guy Fawkes!” kind of way…

  22. jim2 says:

    It may sound shocking to some, but modern-day America compares “favorably” to fascist Germany of the 1930s with regard to the degree to which the state interferes with and controls economic activity.

    Because of the inevitable failures of all government planning in a democracy, Hayek wrote that “the conviction [will grow] that if efficient planning is to be done, the direction must be ‘taken out of politics’ and placed in the hands of experts — permanent officials or independent autonomous bodies.” Moreover, “the cry for an economic dictator is a characteristic stage in the movement toward [central] planning.” This indeed describes many of the above-mentioned agencies and commissions, but is especially descriptive of all the central planning “czars” who now hold office in the federal government. These include the following, as of July 2010: Afghanistan czar, AIDS czar, auto-recovery czar, border czar, California-water czar, car czar, central-region czar (Middle East, Persian Gulf, Afghanistan, Pakistan, and South Asia), climate czar, domestic-violence czar, drug czar, economic czar (Paul Volcker), energy and environment czar, faith-based czar, government-performance czar, Great Lakes czar, green-jobs czar, Guantanamo-closure czar, health czar, information czar, intelligence czar, science czar, stimulus-accountability czar, pay czar, regulatory czar, Sudan czar, TARP czar, Technology czar, terrorism czar, urban-affairs czar, weapons czar, WMD-policy czar, war czar, oil czar, manufacturing czar, cybersecurity czar, safe-school czar, Iran czar, Mideast-peace czar.


  23. E.M.Smith says:

    Sky News has a bit at the EU “Leaders” (looks like Prime Ministers & Presidents to me) around some big round table. The whole “pitch” is just that “Britain MUST pass T.Mays ‘deal’ or No Extension.” Macron, the Austrian leader and some others directly saying it. So they’ve all agreed on the strategy:

    SCARE of “no deal” to herd the British back into the pen. Either via revocation of Article 50 or adoption of the T.May “deal”. Create a sense of anxiety with the only way to relieve it being to stop BREXIT.

    What was interesting was reading the facial expression / body language. T.May FAR more comfortable with these folks. One (back to the camera about 50 degrees so I don’t know who) was sort of consoling her, no sound, but T.May was saying “Yes, I know, ” and something like ~’I still hope we can do this’ (not exactly those words – I can lip read some but it isn’t perfect; sort of a “I’m still trying” sense to it). The overall effect was that these were her friends and peers and she cared far more about “staying in the club” than about representing Britain; and the interests of the British People were not even in mind.

    Sky has another fascinating story about Non-Disclosure Agreements by government agencies working with private parties to prepare for a no-deal BREXIT. Home Office over 100, Department of Transport 79, etc. (calling them “Gag Orders”). One wonders just why the Government is so afraid of truth and reality. Look, it’s just a job to do to get ready. Transparency and efficiency matter most. Embarrassment not at all. Where’s the British equivalent of “Get ‘er Done!”? Why hide preparations for freedom?

    It sure looks like a Government Butt Cover to me…

  24. E.M.Smith says:

    France 24 reporting that the EU has “Granted a short extension” but with strings:

    IF Parliament passes T.May’s deal, the not-a-BREXIT gets delayed to May 22 othereise the hard BREXIT is April 12.

    So it’s a punt back to Parliament for a 3rd vote for T.May’s ‘deal’…

  25. YMMV says:

    @Bill in Oz: “If you want to stay a European watch your language.”
    Not my language, all quotes were from Roger Daltry. Did I hear someone say Who?

    BTW, speaking of getting out … “the matter of Australia becoming a republic began to emerge, later culminating in the 1999 Australian republic referendum, which was defeated by 54.4% of the populace, despite polls showing that the majority supported becoming a republic.” (Wikipedia)

    @Bill in Oz: “The UK joined the European Common Market in 1972-3It did not join the EU.”
    1972. And the first referendum to leave was in 1975.
    European Communities became the European Union in 1993.
    The noose tightens. I’ve read that was and continues to be a conscious strategy of the EU.
    This link has a concise history, but more interesting, it shows poll results over the years.

    @A C Osborn: “Everyone I know who voted leave are now even more adamant that is what we want.”
    But if there was another referendum, would it pass again? By a better margin?
    I agree that everyone is playing up the fear factor. The devil you know always wins.

    @E.M.Smith: “my Mum taught me about Guy Fawkes”
    History can be fascinating (not the dates stuff they teach in school) — as long as you aren’t caught up in the middle of it. The best telling of the Guy Fawkes story is by a Shakespeare prof.
    “The Year of Lear: Shakespeare in 1606”, by James Shapiro.
    This book is highly recommended, it’s about what England was like when Shakespeare wrote three major works. Bloody fascinating. You can draw some modern parallels too.

    @E.M.Smith: “SCARE of “no deal” to herd the British back into the pen.”
    Both May and the EU are using the same tactic, fear of the no deal Brexit. Which is not surprising, since May and the EU do agree; they agree on the deal they made. EU is giving just enough that it can all be blamed on the UK. Macron gives it a 5% chance.

    Getting out is always hard. Looking back on it, the US Civil War was mostly a mistake. What a cost! And the after-effects are still potent. Maybe there was a better way to abolish slavery, ’cause it would be hard to come up with a worse one. (And just in case it’s not clear, yes, slavery is evil).

  26. E.M.Smith says:


    Just a side note on the American War Between The States:

    While Slavery was a sub-text at the start, the major issue was really States Rights and the question of a tight and binding strong Federal Government vs a looser Confederation of States (thus their names).

    In the end, the strong central Federals won, and so the USA became what it is today. That is remarkably similar to the goals of the EUrocrats vs the Nationalists playing out today in Europe. In many ways they have based their plans on the history of the USA moving from a set of Independent States with extremely limited central government to a strong overwhelming central government despite our founding documents being all about NOT having a strong overwhelming central government.

    For those wishing to trot out the “YES IT WAS!!! ALL ABOUT SLAVERY!!!”: Please, don’t bother. It wasn’t until the Union was losing that Lincoln issued the Emancipation Proclamation and made it about slavery. States (like Rhode Island) in the Union had slavery too, while others in the South had very little. Most of the population were not slave holders anyway so why would they be fighting for it? In both the Union and the South there were Black Slave Holders, and both sides had Black Soldiers in their armies; so making it all about race is thin tea too. It IS a very complicated story with race and slavery woven through it, but in a very complex way not captured by the idea the “Civil War” was to end slavery. It may have ended that way, but not until well past the “sell by date” on the fighting. It was much more about Northern Banks & Industry having designs on the South – which they benefited from as Carpet Baggers later. (Again shades of the EU Central Bank vs Greece and Cypress and Italy… )

    Back on BREXIT:

    So what happens now as T. May comes home next week and tries to get a 3rd Bite at the Apple?

    Will Parliament just say “No!” and NOT change the current exit law?

    Will Parliament take the “bad deal”?

    Will Parliament spend until April 11th playing with themselves and moaning about the barb wire in their crotch as they continue to fence sit?

    I can’t imagine a more horrid way to have managed BREXIT and I’ve got a very good imagination and a long history of watching Horror Shows…

  27. A C Osborn says:

    E M, the “Management” is as horrible as the UK Remainers and the EU intended it be from day one.
    108 times T May said in Parliament that we were leaving on the 29th, no one knows how many times she and her party said “Leave Means Leave”, it was all Kabuki (what a lovely word to describe it).
    How any government thinks that they can lie so many times to the public without serious repercussions I am not sure.

  28. A C Osborn says:

    YMMV, are you aware of Document FCO 30/1048, it is a civll service document compild and provided to Ted Heath before the 1975 Referendum laying out how the EC would morph in to the Current and future EU “One Nation”. It was withheld from the Public.

  29. philjourdan says:

    Re: American Civil War (not really Civil in any respect): The EP also did not free slaves in non-rebelling states. indeed, the last slaves to gain independence were in all northern states. As soon as Lee laid down his sword at Appomattox, the slaves were technically free in all rebelling states. But not in northern states.

    I do agree with YMMV, there may have been no better way to end slavery, but there certainly was no worse way.

  30. A C Osborn says:

    E M, yet another twist in the Brexit sell out saga.
    That lovely mrs May has now given the MPs a free vote on 7 Brexit Options.

  31. YMMV says:

    @E.M.Smith: Got it. AWBTS was about succession, after a dispute over states rights; federalism versus confederation. In Brexit terms, that would be sovereignty. In the Quebec referendum attempts, that would be sovereignty-association.

    I should go back and reread the Federalist Papers and all that. The American founders were brilliant. On the other hand, what difference did it make in the end? The American colonies revolted, the Canadian colonies did not. The US is a federation, Canada is a confederation. In name, on the books. On the ground, central governments tend to grab all the power, so the end result is the same. Same words different spellings, so to speak.

    For the US to understand Brexit, imagine (it’s not too hard) that the UN laws overrode every nation’s laws. Squirm now.

    @A C Osborn: Thanks for the clue about FCO 30/1048. It’s rather overwhelming, but a quick search provides some executive summaries:

    “The briefing paper acknowledges that Britain would in time become little more than a puppet state of Brussels, after ceding judicial and executive powers to the fledgling EU – then called the EEC.”

    “the document, known as FCO30/1048, was locked away under Official Secrets Act rules for almost five decades.”

    “The classified paper, dated April 1971, even suggested the Government should keep the British public in the dark about what EEC membership means predicting that it would take 30 years for voters to realise what was happening by which time it would be too late to leave.”

  32. YMMV says:

    Understanding Brexit … NOT!

    In a series of indicative votes, MPs voted down eight separate Brexit proposals, ranging from an extreme no-deal option to the so-called Norway+ scenario, one of the softest version of what has turned into a bitter separation between the EU and UK.

    Motion B – No deal. Introduced by Conservative MP John Baron: 400 against, 160 for
    Motion D – Common market or the so-called Norway+ model. Introduced by Conservative MP Nick Boles: 283 against, 188 for
    Motion H – EEA-EFTA Norway option without customs union. Introduced by Conservative MP George Eustice: 422 against, 139 for
    Motion J – Customs Union. Introduced by Conservative MP Ken Clarke: 272 against, 264 for
    Motion K – Customs union + alignment with single market. Introduced by Labor’s leader Jeremy Corbyn: 307 against, 237 for
    Motion L – Revoke Article 50. Introduced by MP Joanna Cherry, SNP: 293 against, 188 for
    Motion M – Confirmatory referendum on any withdrawal deal. Introduced by Dame Margarett Beckett, Labour: 295 against, 268 for
    Motion O – Put in place contingent arrangement while negotiating a trade deal. Introduced by Conservative MP Marcus Fysh: 422 against, 139 for


    I knew May had a hard job (that nobody else would touch) … I didn’t know it needed Sherlock Holmes.

    I have wondered how the EU has managed to stay together so long. Now I also wonder how the UK can stay together.

  33. Bill in Oz says:

    Looks to me like the UK will accidentally fall off the barb wire fence the Brits have been painfully straddling for years.

    And thus accidentally discover the beneits of being able to govern your own country again.

  34. A C Osborn says:

    YMMV says: 27 March 2019 at 11:47 pm “I knew May had a hard job”

    No she did not have a “hard job”, she only had to invoke Article 50, which Cameron should have done, but resigned instead..
    She should then have sat back, preparing the UK for leaving the EU, until the UK was out of the EU and then asked the EU what deal they would like.
    But despite saying in Parliament over 100 time that We would leave on the 29th March 2019 and Brexit meant Brexit she had absolutely no intention of actually leaving.
    She is and always has been a Remainer.
    The only “hard job” sge had was acting like she was arranging to leave while actually selling out the UK.
    I predicted this on here ages ago.

  35. YMMV says:

    A C Osborn: “No she did not have a “hard job”, she only had to invoke Article 50”

    Correct. As it turns out, the hard job is trying to please everyone and then finding out you are not able to please anyone. The devil is in the details. Getting out is easy, as long as you do not worry about the future.

    On March 29, 2017, the British government notified the EU of its intent to withdraw by invoking Article 50 of the EU’s Lisbon Treaty. In June 2017, the two sides began messy negotiations about the terms of the separation, which was scheduled to take effect on March 29, 2019. London conceded to Brussels’ preferred sequencing for the talks: finalizing the divorce before addressing the future. There was logic to this approach, as the European Union wanted the United Kingdom to make a clean break before determining new arrangements.

    There you have the key strategic move (EU:1, UK:0)
    “finalizing the divorce before addressing the future”

    That puts the fear factor into play, right from the beginning.
    No “we can work it out”, only “commit now and then we’ll see, maybe”

    10 Days to Brexit is becoming 10 Years to Brexit … when the EU falls apart or the EU first kicks out one of the other members, either for being broke or for not being progressive enough.

  36. YMMV says:

    “There are 2 choices: IN. OUT.”
    There are alternative views on this.
    The best was: The choice was between Heaven and Hell, and we got eternal Limbo.

    The EU view there are only three choices:
    “EU law stipulates that there are only three on the table: no deal, no Brexit, or Theresa May’s negotiated deal.”

    Any other form of Brexit requires the much-disliked Withdrawal Agreement – rejected once again by MPs on Friday – to be passed first.
    The EU is prevented by law from negotiating future trade relations with an existing member state. That is why the UK needs to leave first in order to start these negotiations.
    EU leaders understand the reluctance of MPs to enter into a so-called “blind Brexit”, where you don’t know what the future holds. The political declaration document, accompanying the Withdrawal Agreement, is there to give an idea of what might come next.
    The key word is “might”.

    The UK MPs didn’t like any of those very much, so they voted on eight choices before, and now have voted again on the four best losers, and no surprise, they all lost again.

    Motion C, Customs Union, which called for a commitment to negotiate a “permanent and comprehensive UK-wide customs union with the EU,” lost by 276 to 273 votes.

    Motion D, Common Market 2.0, which asked for continued participation in the single market and a “comprehensive customs arrangement” with the EU after Brexit, lost by 282 to 261 votes.

    Motion E, which asked for a public vote to confirm any Brexit deal passed by parliament before its ratification, also lost on Monday night by 292 to 280 votes.

    Motion G, which urged revoking Article 50 in the face of a no-deal Brexit, lost by 292 to 191 votes.

    The Empire did manage to get independence for its colonies (some didn’t work out so well), but now it can’t manage to get its own independence.

Comments are closed.