RugbyRebels

And by the way, this is what OUR government was talking about at cabinet, with regards to a decision that will have gross implications for the future of the UK.

“committed to delivering Brexit — not to do so would be damaging to the Conservative party”

Who gives a toss what it does to the country, just so long as my political party survives.

Where's Lizzie when you need her, breaking protocol to destroy the crown in exchange for us not destroying ourselves.

Stom wrote:On a sunny note, was planning a holiday to the UK...rather complicated...

Will we be able to use ID cards? Will I be stopped on the way back and get my passport stamped? What about the kids? They don't have UK passports, as I never saw the need - we've not been outside Europe with them yet, so ID cards are just easier.

UK government website says: "Nah, you'll be right. Nothing'll change". EU says: border checks, stamps in passports, visas, restrictions on goods, checking of luggage...and more"

Basically, fuck you, UK government.

You already needed a passport to get into Britain, we've never been in the Schengen zone

Which Tyler wrote:

Stom wrote:On a sunny note, was planning a holiday to the UK...rather complicated...

Will we be able to use ID cards? Will I be stopped on the way back and get my passport stamped? What about the kids? They don't have UK passports, as I never saw the need - we've not been outside Europe with them yet, so ID cards are just easier.

UK government website says: "Nah, you'll be right. Nothing'll change". EU says: border checks, stamps in passports, visas, restrictions on goods, checking of luggage...and more"

Basically, fuck you, UK government.

You already needed a passport to get into Britain, we've never been in the Schengen zone

No, you didn't need a passport. We've gone through 10s of times on ID cards, they are perfectly valid forms of identification.

The worst thing is that I checked the UK advice a couple of days ago and it said there would be no change: EU nationals could still enter the UK with their ID cards, no visas needed, etc...which the EU has now said is complete bollox.

Which Tyler wrote:

Stom wrote:On a sunny note, was planning a holiday to the UK...rather complicated...

Will we be able to use ID cards? Will I be stopped on the way back and get my passport stamped? What about the kids? They don't have UK passports, as I never saw the need - we've not been outside Europe with them yet, so ID cards are just easier.

UK government website says: "Nah, you'll be right. Nothing'll change". EU says: border checks, stamps in passports, visas, restrictions on goods, checking of luggage...and more"

Basically, fuck you, UK government.

You already needed a passport to get into Britain, we've never been in the Schengen zone

And official confirmation if you needed it: https://www.gov.uk/uk-border-control/be ... for-the-uk

Fair enough. I've always had to have a passport, and my brother in law was turned back at Calais for not having one.

Which Tyler wrote:Fair enough. I've always had to have a passport, and my brother in law was turned back at Calais for not having one.

In theory Europe was open borders, at least before 9/11, but in practice you've always needed a passport

Which Tyler wrote:Fair enough. I've always had to have a passport, and my brother in law was turned back at Calais for not having one.

Oh, Brits need it. But EU nationals who don't have insane governments who decide not to have ID cards on the back of Daily Mail articles CAN go anywhere on the ID card they need to carry with them at all times anyway, and which fits into their wallet (except the frankly insane Romanians, who have some big ass piece of shit).

My brother-in-law is French, with a French ID card when he was turned away, 3-4 years ago

Digby wrote:

Which Tyler wrote:Fair enough. I've always had to have a passport, and my brother in law was turned back at Calais for not having one.

In theory Europe was open borders, at least before 9/11, but in practice you've always needed a passport

You don't need a passport to travel between any land border within the EU. But any policeman has the right to demand one off you, even if you're a native of that country. Though I've never seen that in the UK, it happens here and in Austria for sure. And in Romania, but as they're technically not in the Schengen, it's a different matter.

Which Tyler wrote:My brother-in-law is French, with a French ID card when he was turned away

That's insanity. So it belongs right here on this thread

Stom wrote:

Which Tyler wrote:My brother-in-law is French, with a French ID card when he was turned away

That's insanity. So it belongs right here on this thread

It felt wrong at the time, but none of us really knew.

Which Tyler wrote:

Banquo wrote: No. Norway plus and EU 2.0 are worse than staying and their proponents need to say so. The WA in theory offers the opportunity to negotiate something different than BRINO minus, in practice no-one believes it likely that it will be a good outcome. Their strategy is exactly what you say.

Personally I'm hugely in favour of Germany+; though granted, it's not really a compromise position.

indeed and indeed. Hence those advocating BRINO minus or whatever need to be honest and say we already have it good compared to other EU members and we should stay in.

Banquo wrote:

Which Tyler wrote:

Banquo wrote: No. Norway plus and EU 2.0 are worse than staying and their proponents need to say so. The WA in theory offers the opportunity to negotiate something different than BRINO minus, in practice no-one believes it likely that it will be a good outcome. Their strategy is exactly what you say.

Personally I'm hugely in favour of Germany+; though granted, it's not really a compromise position.

indeed and indeed. Hence those advocating BRINO minus or whatever need to be honest and say we already have it good compared to other EU members and we should stay in.

But that doesn’t respect the result of the narrowly won, Russian influenced, dog whistle politics motivated referendum that cannot under any circumstances be revisited.

Letwin wins, now its going to get very weird! I'll wager May resigns before end of week.

Banquo wrote:Letwin wins, now its going to get very weird! I'll wager May resigns before end of week.

Well, she's got another 3 resignation letters she can crib.

Don't see her resigning over this though, especially given so many better reason. She has no shame! Besides, her plan is to kick the can further down the road, and trynto fracture parliament as much as possible in the mean time, then bring back her deal aroind April 9th or 10th, hoping that being last minute will finally convince people that she was right all along.

lol....from the beeb
What happens now?
Indicative votes will now be held on Wednesday on various Brexit options, in addition to Theresa May's deal, which could include:

Revoking Article 50 and cancelling Brexit
Another referendum
The PM's deal plus a customs union
The PM's deal plus both a customs union and single market access
A Canada-style free trade agreement
Leaving the EU without a deal

So......three and four mean leaving and a transition period, wherein we negotiate back some of what we already have, freedom of movement, ECJ, no free trade deals, EU tariffs, but no say/vote and still pay money. Sounds eminently sensible.

Which Tyler wrote:

Banquo wrote:Letwin wins, now its going to get very weird! I'll wager May resigns before end of week.

Well, she's got another 3 resignation letters she can crib.

Don't see her resigning over this though, especially given so many better reason. She has no shame! Besides, her plan is to kick the can further down the road, and trynto fracture parliament as much as possible in the mean time, then bring back her deal aroind April 9th or 10th, hoping that being last minute will finally convince people that she was right all along.

I said end of week; IF one of the alternatives gets a majority, what will she then do.

Banquo wrote:

Which Tyler wrote:

Banquo wrote:Letwin wins, now its going to get very weird! I'll wager May resigns before end of week.

Well, she's got another 3 resignation letters she can crib.

Don't see her resigning over this though, especially given so many better reason. She has no shame! Besides, her plan is to kick the can further down the road, and trynto fracture parliament as much as possible in the mean time, then bring back her deal aroind April 9th or 10th, hoping that being last minute will finally convince people that she was right all along.

I said end of week; IF one of the alternatives gets a majority, what will she then do.

Ignore it as not "delivering the result of the referendum" and schedule the next vote on her deal, obviously.

Puja

Banquo wrote:

Which Tyler wrote:

Banquo wrote:Letwin wins, now its going to get very weird! I'll wager May resigns before end of week.

Well, she's got another 3 resignation letters she can crib.

Don't see her resigning over this though, especially given so many better reason. She has no shame! Besides, her plan is to kick the can further down the road, and trynto fracture parliament as much as possible in the mean time, then bring back her deal aroind April 9th or 10th, hoping that being last minute will finally convince people that she was right all along.

I said end of week; IF one of the alternatives gets a majority, what will she then do.

Ignore it? Condemn it as being a betrayal of democracy?



Beckett amendment fails... By 3

That's if the UK is seven days away from leaving without a deal, the government must move a motion within two sitting days (or recall Parliament) to vote on whether to go ahead with no-deal or request an extension "to give time for Parliament to determine a different approach".


May now shipping Tories against her own motion now it's been ammended... Again.

I'm not actually sure what the actual motion is (I'd though Letwins was the motion, and Beckett's the amendment)

Which Tyler wrote:

Banquo wrote:

Which Tyler wrote: Well, she's got another 3 resignation letters she can crib.

Don't see her resigning over this though, especially given so many better reason. She has no shame! Besides, her plan is to kick the can further down the road, and trynto fracture parliament as much as possible in the mean time, then bring back her deal aroind April 9th or 10th, hoping that being last minute will finally convince people that she was right all along.

I said end of week; IF one of the alternatives gets a majority, what will she then do.

Ignore it? Condemn it as being a betrayal of democracy?



Beckett amendment fails... By 3

That's if the UK is seven days away from leaving without a deal, the government must move a motion within two sitting days (or recall Parliament) to vote on whether to go ahead with no-deal or request an extension "to give time for Parliament to determine a different approach".


May now shipping Tories against her own motion now it's been ammended... Again.

I'm not actually sure what the actual motion is (I'd though Letwins was the motion, and Beckett's the amendment)

Govt put forward a motion on indicative votes, which Letwin amended, which govt didn’t like.

Thinking on May as she returns to parliament one might conclude old red eyes is back taking a mother's pride in the idea that after taking a little time she can move from saying I'll sail this ship alone and I hate you to noting of her deal here it is again, it's not merely a song for whoever and I think the answer's yes, the important thing of course is not merely being seen to carry on regardless

Banquo wrote:lol....from the beeb
What happens now?
Indicative votes will now be held on Wednesday on various Brexit options, in addition to Theresa May's deal, which could include:

Revoking Article 50 and cancelling Brexit
Another referendum
The PM's deal plus a customs union
The PM's deal plus both a customs union and single market access
A Canada-style free trade agreement
Leaving the EU without a deal

So......three and four mean leaving and a transition period, wherein we negotiate back some of what we already have, freedom of movement, ECJ, no free trade deals, EU tariffs, but no say/vote and still pay money. Sounds eminently sensible.

Option 3 is the WA with the backstop becoming permanent I reckon.

Digby wrote:Thinking on May as she returns to parliament one might conclude old red eyes is back taking a mother's pride in the idea that after taking a little time she can move from saying I'll sail this ship alone and I hate you to noting of her deal here it is again, it's not merely a song for whoever and I think the answer's yes, the important thing of course is not merely being seen to carry on regardless

That's beautiful - very much a Southern viewpoint, but beautiful nonetheless

One Tory apparently supported and opposed Letwin's amendment. Lol

FFS- no sh*t you absolute idiot. They- and its not just him- have not understood that this is exactly what the EU view Brexit as. I do think May et al should have explained the WA better in this context, but hey


"Leading Brexiteer Jacob Rees-Mogg tells Conservative Home: "Inevitably leaving the European Union, even leaving it inadequately and having work to do afterwards, is better than not leaving it at all.

"Perhaps the thought processes that people like me hadn't gone through before is the thought that Brexit is a process rather than an event." "