Ad blocker detected: Our website is made possible by displaying online advertisements to our visitors. Please consider supporting us by disabling your ad blocker on our website.
The primary goal of this site is to provide mature, meaningful discussion about the Vancouver Canucks. However, we all need a break some time so this forum is basically for anything off-topic, off the wall, or to just get something off your chest! This forum is named after poster Creeper, who passed away in July of 2011 and was a long time member of the Canucks message board community.
May lost again in parliament. First they put the same deal that had previously lost 432-202 to another vote and lost again. Big surprise.
Then the govt suggested a vote for not leaving on March 29th without a deal, then some MPs managed to sharpen it to not leaving at all ever without a deal, after which the government voted against their own proposal and still lost. Or won. I mean, it was their proposal, and it won, even though they themselves voted against it. It's a mess.
I think the NHL should give the Messier Leadership Award to May, because leadership cannot possibly be messier than this...
Two weeks till Brexit, and they still have no deal, or a clue to what a deal should look like, and just voted to not leave without a deal. But unless the EU grants them an extension, or they themselves revoke article 50, they will leave on March 29th, without a deal. It's complicated.
Whatever you do, always give 100 %!
Except when donating blood.
UK lawmakers have voted to reject holding a second referendum on #Brexit.
By a tally of 334 votes to 85, the idea has been shot down.
Yes. For the time being.
Eg Labour said that they do not reject the idea of a second referendum, if all else fails, but now is not the time.
They want to attempt to negotiate a new deal instead of the one May has negotiated first, completely disregarding that the EU has stated that negotiations are now over and the UK must just decide whether they accept the deal or not.
There are basically just three options on the table:
- leaving according to May's deal
- leaving without a deal
- revoking Article 50 and remaining
May's deal has already been rejected twice by parliament, yet she has the audacity to intend to call a third vote on it!
It would be very weird if it suddenly passed, as neither the hard line Brexiteers nor the remainers favour it.
Parliament just voted to reject the option of leaving without a deal. But if nothing happens before March 29th, that is exactly what will happen. With parliament having banned this option, it would look very bad for the May government though, and I guess it could even lead to legal challenges, as parliament are th elaw makers, and their decisions must be respected by the government.
The European Court has announced that the UK has the right to unilaterally revoke Article 50 (the declaration that the UK intends to leave the EU) at any time up till March 29th, and that they in that case remain members of the union. This would definitely lead to an outcry from those who voted for Brexit though, who would feel that they have been betrayed.
(I actually have some issues with the sign; it lacks a comma and should end in a question mark rather than an exclamation one, but, yeah...)
The British have asked for an extension to get more time (probably just to sputter about doing nothing but calling eachother names), but that needs to be approved by all 27 remaining EU member states, with each one having the right of veto.
In my opinion the only way out of this is to hold a second referendum with two questions:
1) Should the deal to leave that May has negotiated with the EU be accepted? Yes or No.
2) If May's deal is rejected by the people, what should the consequence be? Leave without a deal or Remain.
When the first referendum was held, it was not clear what the implications of Brexit would be.
Some suggested a Norwegian solution, some a Swiss, some a Canadian, some a clean break (ie what would happen under no deal).
Now that there is a negotiated deal on the table, there are three clear cut options, the ones I described above.
This would actually allow the voters to make an informed decision. The consequences of all three options should be clear.
If a majority of the people like the deal May has negotiated, that option should have precedence over the other two options. Thus that question should be asked first. If however, that deal is rejected, I think a lot of those that might favour Brexit would still have qualms about doing it without any deal, so the question then is do you want to do it hardcore or do you want to back away from the abyss?
Oh well. We'll just have to wait and see what happens I guess.
Meanwhile, while we prepare the popcorn, here's a little video to watch. It's actually not what it looks like from the title, but gives a good summary of the extreme positions the UK has held in the Brexit negotiations, compared to the relations the EU has with other neighbours.
Whatever you do, always give 100 %!
Except when donating blood.
Another fun read. The speaker of the House of Commons has decided that he will not allow a third vote on the same deal, citing an old law that states that you cannot vote on the same issue twice in the same session of parliament.
There are basically Three options, May's deal, No deal, Revoking article 50 and remaining.
Now there cannot be a third vote on May's deal, the parliament has said it cannot accept a No Deal Brexit and revoking article 50 without a new referendum or general elections would possibly cause a civil war...
It's complicated.
Whatever you do, always give 100 %!
Except when donating blood.
Also, Theresa May is asking for an extension till June 30th, but the EU will likely not grant this.
Either the UK should leave before the EU parliamentary elections that are held 23-26 of May (different days in different countries) or make a longer commitment, participate in the elections and stay at least till the end of the year.
Having Brexit coincide with the elections will be too messy and complicated.
The EU also demands to know why the UK needs an extension and what they plan to do during the extension.
There is a cost for uncertainty, and the uncertainty should not be prolonged if there is not a very good reason for it.
The Swedish government has nothing against granting an extension as long as the UK can provide a motivation for why it is needed. We will not accept any further negotiations though. The negotiating is done. Now it is just up to the UK to decide if they want to accept the deal, leave without a deal or revoke article 50 and stay.
The ball is firmly in the British court. It is the UK that needs to decide what they want. The EU is just waiting for an answer.
Whatever you do, always give 100 %!
Except when donating blood.
Reefer2 wrote: ↑Wed Mar 20, 2019 1:03 pm
Stupid Brits getting what they deserve.
Great analysis as always Reef.
Some of us have a life outside of CC.
Unlike you I a) do not move the goalposts b) add drivel to confuse the person you are arguing with c) just wear down your opponent so they give up so you can put your "I am the King of CC" belt on.
Question - when you go to bed at night, do you still wear the belt?
Reefer2 wrote: ↑Wed Mar 20, 2019 1:03 pm
Stupid Brits getting what they deserve.
Great analysis as always Reef.
Some of us have a life outside of CC.
Unlike you I a) do not move the goalposts b) add drivel to confuse the person you are arguing with c) just wear down your opponent so they give up so you can put your "I am the King of CC" belt on.
Question - when you go to bed at night, do you still wear the belt?
Reefer2 wrote: ↑Wed Mar 20, 2019 1:03 pm
Stupid Brits getting what they deserve.
Great analysis as always Reef.
Some of us have a life outside of CC.
Unlike you I a) do not move the goalposts b) add drivel to confuse the person you are arguing with c) just wear down your opponent so they give up so you can put your "I am the King of CC" belt on.
Question - when you go to bed at night, do you still wear the belt?
What's wrong Reef? Not getting any?
Not getting what?
A belt that has "I am the King of CC" or any other belt - nope can't say I am getting that.
Anything else and there is no need to answer that.
Reefer2 wrote: ↑Wed Mar 20, 2019 1:03 pm
Stupid Brits getting what they deserve.
Great analysis as always Reef.
Some of us have a life outside of CC.
Unlike you I a) do not move the goalposts b) add drivel to confuse the person you are arguing with c) just wear down your opponent so they give up so you can put your "I am the King of CC" belt on.
Question - when you go to bed at night, do you still wear the belt?
Reefer2 wrote: ↑Wed Mar 20, 2019 1:03 pm
Stupid Brits getting what they deserve.
Great analysis as always Reef.
Some of us have a life outside of CC.
Unlike you I a) do not move the goalposts b) add drivel to confuse the person you are arguing with c) just wear down your opponent so they give up so you can put your "I am the King of CC" belt on.
Question - when you go to bed at night, do you still wear the belt?
Yes, I wear the belt and nothing else!
Now be careful when you're with you-know-who to make sure you moan with pauses.
Make it sound like STRANGE . LOVE rather than STRANGELOVE.
