The big day is here

[Zigenare]

Why? What would you want changed in the Withdrawal Agreeement?

Everything! Every single thing. Every bloody item that the EU conceded needs to be renegotiated after we've left.

[Whorty]

He did say, and is very true of what happened last night, there are some who no matter what have no Interest in the project and will do their up most to derail the project. In that case opm said the project would be cancelled.

There are always people in orgs against projects, for varying and personal/selfish reasons. Should we therefore just give up on projects then? Not a great way to becoming a successful PM contractor.

The skill is to take everyone on the journey to make the project a success. It's not always easy, and may require compromise. Brexiters however don't seem to want to compromise (we want to leave now on WTO, and sod the economy!!!); no remainer will buy into that. Many remainers however are accepting that we are leaving, but the deal has to be right for the country. Remainers seem to be ready to compromise (OK, not all, but you're looking to win hearts and minds here to get the terms of the project agreed).

However, just because of what happened last night I do not think that the Brexit process should be cancelled because 400 want to overturn democracy.

But do 400 want to overthrow democracy? Polls show that the majority of the public, whether they voted leave or remain were against the May deal, so you could argue that 400 are respecting democracy but 250 are not.

Further, of those 400 many were Brexiters who very much want to leave the EU so claim to be supporting the 'will of the people'.

It sounds like you and OPM think MPs should have supported May last night. This is the problem though; you both voted leave, but you are both at odds with what the majority of leave voters say they want in the polls.

Wrt no deal. It is still an option that is entrenched in an act of parliament. If we reach March29th with no agreed deal we leave on WTO rules and no deal. To state that no deal is not an option is wrong as it is currently a fact of law.

Give it a day or so and this will no longer be an option, don't worry. And as you seem to be suggesting that MPs should have backed May, then you wouldn't want to leave on WTO terms anyway so it would suit you that no deal is removed for good as an option.

[meridian]

Everything! Every single thing. Every bloody item that the EU conceded needs to be renegotiated after we've left.

That sounds like you don't want a Withdrawal Agreement? You would rather have the chaos of citizen's rights, borders, outstanding liabilities, and geographical indicators left in the air with no agreement?

[Zigenare]

That sounds like you don't want a Withdrawal Agreement? You would rather have the chaos of citizen's rights, borders, outstanding liabilities, and geographical indicators left in the air with no agreement?

Does it?

[Yorkie62]

There are always people in orgs against projects, for varying and personal/selfish reasons. Should we therefore just give up on projects then? Not a great way to becoming a successful PM contractor.

The skill is to take everyone on the journey to make the project a success. It's not always easy, and may require compromise. Brexiters however don't seem to want to compromise (we want to leave now on WTO, and sod the economy!!!); no remainer will buy into that. Many remainers however are accepting that we are leaving, but the deal has to be right for the country. Remainers seem to be ready to compromise (OK, not all, but you're looking to win hearts and minds here to get the terms of the project agreed).


But do 400 want to overthrow democracy? Polls show that the majority of the public, whether they voted leave or remain were against the May deal, so you could argue that 400 are respecting democracy but 250 are not.

Further, of those 400 many were Brexiters who very much want to leave the EU so claim to be supporting the 'will of the people'.

It sounds like you and OPM think MPs should have supported May last night. This is the problem though; you both voted leave, but you are both at odds with what the majority of leave voters say they want in the polls.


Give it a day or so and this will no longer be an option, don't worry. And as you seem to be suggesting that MPs should have backed May, then you wouldn't want to leave on WTO terms anyway so it would suit you that no deal is removed for good as an option.

How exactly. What you are suggesting it that parliament has the right to change the Lisbon treaty. That is the only way of taking no deal off the table and still respecting the result of the referendum.
True the A50 end date can be postponed but this still does not take no deal off the table. If we reach the end date with no agreed deal we leave with no deal and an extension would need agreement of all 27 EU members. The EU has elections in May so A50 extension will only be of limited duration.

Sent from my SM-G955F using Contractor UK Forum mobile app

[Lance]

If the Remainers won, the Brexiters would demand another vote!

Which they'd never get. A 2nd ref would be the last ref ever.

If the Brexiters won, even by a higher majority, would that be enough to appease the Remainers?

Yes it would as it'd be clear as the choices would be much clearer and known. If the brexiteers decided to crash out despite the risks then so be it we'd all know what they are. If they decided to go with a deal that has risks but less then also fine.

The issue with the last ref was that leave wasn't clear about what it meant.

[Whorty]

Everything! Every single thing. Every bloody item that the EU conceded needs to be renegotiated after we've left.

Apart from the backstop, name another point in the deal that you think needs changing and give your logic for that assertion. Or are you just reading Wail headlines?

99.99999% of the UK voting public have absolutely no idea of the details of May's WA but loads spout cr@p about it not being right, we're shafted by the EU blah blah blah, because they believe every headline and soundbite they read and hear.

Was May's deal any good .... you know what, I have no idea. I do know it would have taken us out of the EU (as was voted for in 2016) and would give us 2 years to agree this wonderful FTA that leavers say is so easy to get. I'd have accepted May's deal. I'll accept Norway. I'll accept staying in the EU if needs be. But I won't accept the childish, "let's leave on WTO and screw the EU" games being played as that helps no one, least of all the UK.

[meridian]

Does it?

You're as clear as mud on what you actually want and expect. No wonder the country is in this mess.

Keep deflecting, don't commit to anything, but sit back and moan if things don't go your way (which nobody can tell until after the fact because you're being so obtuse).

[Lance]

Apart from the backstop, name another point in the deal that you think needs changing and give your logic for that assertion. Or are you just reading Wail headlines?

99.99999% of the UK voting public have absolutely no idea of the details of May's WA but loads spout cr@p about it not being right, we're shafted by the EU blah blah blah, because they believe every headline and soundbite they read and hear.

Was May's deal any good .... you know what, I have no idea. I do know it would have taken us out of the EU (as was voted for in 2016) and would give us 2 years to agree this wonderful FTA that leavers say is so easy to get. I'd have accepted May's deal. I'll accept Norway. I'll accept staying in the EU if needs be. But I won't accept the childish, "let's leave on WTO and screw the EU" games being played as that helps no one, least of all the UK.

Yes I think it was a good deal given the constraints. They were....
- End free movement
- leave the single market
- end ECJ jurisdiction

The compromises ....
- The backstop (Ireland seemed to have been forgotten during the campaign).
- the transition (which makes sense as agreeing a future deal was always going to take time)

All in all, given those constraints the compromises were quite generous to the UK gov.
So yes it's a good deal. Not as good as cancelling this whole tulipshow. Not as good as a Norway or Swiss deal.

Let's be very clear..... The bill failed for 2 reasons only...
- Swivel eyed *****
- Remainers who reckon we can get to stay in or get a Norway/Swiss deal
any other suggestion is just politicking

[meridian]

Yes I think it was a good deal given the constraints. They were....
- End free movement
- leave the single market
- end ECJ jurisdiction

The compromises ....
- The backstop (Ireland seemed to have been forgotten during the campaign).
- the transition (which makes sense as agreeing a future deal was always going to take time)

All in all, given those constraints the compromises were quite generous to the UK gov.
So yes it's a good deal. Not as good as cancelling this whole tulipshow. Not as good as a Norway or Swiss deal.

Let's be very clear..... The bill failed for 2 reasons only...
- Swivel eyed *****
- Remainers who reckon we can get to stay in or get a Norway/Swiss deal
any other suggestion is just politicking

Pretty much this.

The backstop is temporary, and dependent on the UK coming up with an agreed solution. As we've heard so often from Brexiters over the past two years they have all the answers (technology, etc) so it should be a no-brainer for the Brexiters to design and implement in the two-year transition.

As for the transition, even with no deal as the future state it makes sense to have 2 years to prepare fully for that.