Brexit: anti no-deal bill pass 329 vs 300, they are talking about a "first stage bill" maybe some UK pard member could explain what is this "first stage" ?

This post was edited by Saucisson6000 on Sep 4 2019 11:34am

Boris his negotiating position vs the EU destroyed by his own parliament within days of the shutdown.

If only they had a consistent plan for the sake of the UK. Unless obstruction and stalling for not leaving is a consistent plan ofc

This post was edited by Knoppie on Sep 4 2019 11:41am

What negotiating position? The EU have been waiting for new proposals from Boris' negotiating team for 3 weeks and have had nothing. There is no plan to solve the backstop issue because the solution simply doesn't exist with current technology.

Maybe I would have wanted no deal on the table if Boris had advanced negotiations instead of proroguing parliament and actively pursuing a no deal brexit.

Oh look what i found regarding the anti no-deal law validation process


-- translate --

Once adopted by British MPs, the text must pass the test of the House of Lords, the upper house of the British Parliament, before being formally promulgated by Queen Elizabeth II. Only here will the anti-"no deal" text be considered a law.

However, if all this work is delayed and the law is not promulgated by 9 September, the text will simply be thrown in the trash. Indeed, when Parliament is suspended as part of a prorogation - remember, at the end of August, Boris Johnson announced that Parliament would not sit between September 9 and October 14 - the laws that did not completed are canceled. MEPs should then start from scratch when the session reopens on 14 October, 17 days before leaving the EU without an agreement.

However, according to the BBC, a small group of members of the House of Lords who support the government are already preparing to block the law by continuing debates already planned to be interminable.

-- translate --

Wow this means its possible the no-deal really occurs ?

This post was edited by Saucisson6000 on Sep 4 2019 12:14pm

as much as a like to see that clown fail, this is a shit outcome imo. just means another delay with 'negotiations' that end nowhere because the brits just don't understand the limits of what is negotiable.

no-deal brexit now, get this shit over with. sure it'll hurt us too, but like i said from the very beginning: i'd rather have a clean break than all those pointless and neverending negotiations. that insecurity isn't good for the markets either...

nah. hold a general election on october 14th. the MPs can use the prorogation to campaign. since we're really in crunch time now, every candidate will have to take a clear stance if they would support a hard brexit or not.
therefore, the resulting balance of power in the HoC will reflect the voice of the people. it would de facto be the 2nd referendum that the Remainers always wanted.

if there is a clear majority of Remainers after the election, the UK can withdraw article 50. if there is a majority for hard brexit, they can go ahead. if there is a majority for a Brexit with a deal and a majority against a hard Brexit at the same time, then the UK can ask the EU for another extension.

This post was edited by Black XistenZ on Sep 4 2019 12:44pm

I think the MPs will probably block a no-deal, and if it's not this week (my previous post) it will still be possible in the last 2 weeks just before oct 31.
Seems UK lost negotiations, but it's just a battle and does not deliver the full picture of Brexit chronicles.

no deal isn't a 'clean break' though. It would be back to square one negotiating a deal with the EU but with negative economic consequences for both.

we'd be negotiating with a non-member on the basis of wto rules, which already IS regulated, and would still grant access to the european market - just not unrestricted. of course it'd be possible to negotiate a trade deal after that, but it'd be a clean break both politically as well as economically, with a regulated path forward - as opposed to the current insecurity and negotiations based on entirely conflicting expectations and promises of what a deal could look like.