+ Visit Rotherham United FC Mad for Latest News, Transfer Gossip, Fixtures and Match Results

Page 321 of 349 FirstFirst ... 221271311319320321322323331 ... LastLast
Results 3,201 to 3,210 of 3487

Thread: O/T DDay for Brexit..well sort of...

  1. #3201
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Posts
    9,235
    Quote Originally Posted by KerrAvon View Post
    Hey, Zyles, great to see you man! Long time no speak.

    You are right, my point was clumsily put. I should have said an extension with a poorly defined purpose and uncertain outcome. For some people it would be about securing a further referendum (with the hope that would stop Brexit), for others it would be about securing a revocation of the Article 50 notification (which would stop Brexit), for some it would be about trying to secure a harder/softer deal (depending upon their personal taste) and for others it would be about winging Johnson and then trying to secure power for themselves through a GE.


    Hey, Zyles, great to see you man! Long time no speak.[/QUOTE]

    Don't like all this familiarity Kerr
    I know your game
    First you start with friendly small talk
    Next you will be inviting me out for a drink [probably cocktails]
    Then next a meal
    Possibly a box at NY stadium
    Then round to your place to see your etchings or even your law degree
    & before I have time to log off & log on again you will be wanting to entice me up to your bedroom
    No sir I will not play the trollop for you
    You stick to wooing roly

  2. #3202
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    1,238
    Rotherham Labour MP Sarah Champion says she will vote for Johnson's deal.

  3. #3203
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    3,919
    At last, a Labour MP with sense, the Rotherham MP will vote for the deal, the deal that will respect the vote of the people, Unlike commie Corbyn who rejected the deal be fore even reading the text, duplicitous or what.

  4. #3204
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Posts
    9,235
    Quote Originally Posted by Redshank View Post
    Rotherham Labour MP Sarah Champion says she will vote for Johnson's deal.
    Obviously not read it

  5. #3205
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Posts
    9,235
    Quote Originally Posted by claw84 View Post
    At last, a Labour MP with sense, the Rotherham MP will vote for the deal, the deal that will respect the vote of the people, Unlike commie Corbyn who rejected the deal be fore even reading the text, duplicitous or what.
    Have you read it?

  6. #3206
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    5,714
    Quote Originally Posted by Redshank View Post
    Rotherham Labour MP Sarah Champion says she will vote for Johnson's deal.
    I'm surprised Mrs Badger is straying from the red carpet.
    As we know though it doesn't make any difference what a labour controlled area does because the flock will still vote them in

  7. #3207
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    3,919
    Quote Originally Posted by Exiletyke View Post
    Have you read it?
    I have read enough to know it would be better than leaving with no deal, Labour said at the 2017 election they would respect the referendum so they have absolutely no excuse for not voting for it. If they don't there is a lot of labour MP's who will lose their seats in the coming election,that applies to traitor torys as well, the lib dems are beneath contempt.

  8. #3208
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    2,752
    Quote Originally Posted by KerrAvon View Post
    I see that you have retreated from your parroting of the tin-foil hat wearing, Guardian published, conspiracy theory that Johnson didn’t want a deal.

    I would prefer to remain than enter into a Norway style BRINO monstrosity of the type that Labour appears to have in mind (insofar as it is possible to tell), so I will assume that I fit into your anti-BRINO group.

    I think the deal is an interesting way of addressing the real issue, which is that Brexit is fundamentally incompatible with the Good Friday Agreement (GFA) unless and until technical solutions can be developed and/or accepted such as to make it possible for there to be a border on the island of Ireland without any customs checks.

    Whilst I have sympathy with Unionists who feel that they are being taken a step away from the union, that sympathy is limited given that the history of Ireland makes for a unique problem that requires a unique solution. Most importantly, however, the notion that the arrangement will be subject to review and renewal by Stormont, brings it in line with the concept of ‘consent’ which underpins the GFA and Anglo-Irish relations. I get that the DUP don’t like that, but nobody can have everything that they want.

    Given that you always seem to be so remarkably on message with the Labour Party, can you tell me what their current thinking is on the risk associated with working to vote this deal down? They whipped against May’s reasonably soft deal and now looks set to vote against Johnson’s harder deal, both of which were accepted by the EU only after extensive negotiations. Are they happy to throw the dice and take the risk that the EU states will unanimously agree to extend so that there can be a third bite at the cherry? Bear in mind that the default position is a no deal exit on 31st October.
    Hiya Kerriplops

    Re: the ‘conspiracy theory’, there are a number of positions: some believe that Johnson by alienating the DUP as well as kicking the ‘LPF’ statement from legal to non-legal agreement that he has set it up as a deal that has no chance of getting through, and therefore set himself up as a ‘honest broker’ (sic) who ‘tried for the people’ but was blocked by those nasty MPs, therefore setting himself up for an attempt at No Deal and if not, to take the ‘Man of the People’ who tried but was thwarted look into a GE.

    However, my gut feeling is that he has genuinely tried to get a deal and I was wrong in saying that he had no intention of a deal. But I am cutting him a BIG benefit of the doubt there (I'm sure he's relieved!), as I can see no reason why the LPF text should have been removed from the WA and moved into non legal text. Why do you think that that happened? I can see that it plays to a feeling of control over our standards, but we can always improve our own standards, anytime. The EU can't stop us. So why?

    I think that Labour will oppose, as they weren’t really given any other option. There was no further attempt to pivot the deal towards their concerns on standards and in fact the removal of the LPF is a bit of a two fingers of intent to them. A shame as with this text in the WA, at least there was a legally worded guarantee of LPF which might have got more Labour MPs onside to compensate but it is obviously too important to the backers of Brexit that there are no such intentions to protect standards at even EU minimum level, which says an awful lot about where this government intent to go. For me personally, if that text hadn’t been removed, I would have backed the deal in order to move to the next stage. Plus the fact that I’m as sick of it as anyone and really want to see it done and move on to the next stage. The fact that it was removed for me reveals the big motivation behind Brexit, and that doesn’t look promising for the workers/consumers/environment.

    Are they happy to take the risk? I think that they will be more informed than me as to the robustness of the Benn act and the all likelihood that the EU will of course accept an extension over a No Deal. I think the main pressure is public perception at this stage, with polling showing support for the deal overall. This may be weariness, but it’s real and Labour will most certainly cop much flack for voting it down which of course will alienate more people. But I guess they have to do what they think is right and the complete lack of any kind of negotiation with Labour makes it quite easy for them to oppose. Building consensus has just not happened outside of the conservative party itself.

    So you keep asking why should we not define our own standards? I accept that the UK taking control of these standards from the EU could have a potential benefit of a future government being free of a potential EU swing to lower our protections carte blanche, should that unprecedented eventuality come about. And yes, our governments are also free to uphold high quality standards. But anyone who has followed the EU over the last 30 years has no reason to think that they would move in this kind of way, whereas if agreeing this deal we are being asked to trust future governments to at least uphold the minimum EU standards that they have gone to enormous lengths to phase out of the WA. Should we trust this, and future governments based on the performance of successive governments of the last 40 years? Even most of the people in the government don’t trust anything the PM says.

    If we accept that you are being a bit whimsical re: the EU suddenly wanting to lower all standards across the board, despite no historical evidence of them being in the slightest bit interested in doing such a thing, can you think of another reason why we shouldn’t want to keep these EU standards as a baseline minimum? We can and should improve on them, of course and some governments are free to do this anyway. But what for you is the harm of keeping the standards as a legal minimum?

  9. #3209
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    18,694
    Just thinking ahead, if there is a deal what are the implications for a GE then?. If its true that hardline brexiteers will kick the ball out till we leave the EU without a trade agreement in Dec 2020 surely it would be best for opposition parties to resist the urge for forcing a GE because they can keep this minority govt as it is in check to make sure they don't do that amongst other deviant things.

    To force a GE now would be pretty suicidal for opposition parties because Boris is gonna be seen as a bit of a hero for getting Brexit over the line plus he wont have his vote divided with the Brexit party who will cease to exist in any real shape or form. Also another year at least before a GE will mean that Boris will have plenty of time to trip himself up in that time and voters will also will not quite be so euphoric for him once the dust has settled.
    Last edited by rolymiller; 18-10-2019 at 03:20 PM.

  10. #3210
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    1,238
    Quote Originally Posted by flourbasher View Post
    I'm surprised Mrs Badger is straying from the red carpet.
    As we know though it doesn't make any difference what a labour controlled area does because the flock will still vote them in
    Nevertheless, as a confirmed remainer herself, she's honourably following the majority will of her electorate to vote for Brexit. Can you bring yourself to give credit where it's due?

Page 321 of 349 FirstFirst ... 221271311319320321322323331 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •