Brexit.

[seafoid]

Pushing back the date requires all 27 to support.

Withdrawing 50 is unilateral by the UK only

If the Brits appear to be be making genuine progress towards something coherent in the reality spectrum I think Article 50 could be extended. Apparently the EU are thinking of waiting until the hurling round robin is over to decide on Brexit

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/jan/13/eu-preparing-to-delay-brexit-until-at-least-july

Brexit so far has  been operating in the fantasy spectrum

[gallsman]

She'll win the no confidence motion, rightly so too. Corbyn would make an even bigger mess of things and everyone beyond some of his sycophantic inner circle know it.

In fairness, they probably know it too and just pretend otherwise.

[seafoid]

She'll win the no confidence motion, rightly so too. Corbyn would make an even bigger mess of things and everyone beyond some of his sycophantic inner circle know it.

In fairness, they probably know it too and just pretend otherwise.

Voting against her yesterday and for her today is incoherent
The Eurosceptics want a weak PM but other Tories do not

[seafoid]

FT

May's defeat spells trouble for the EU's Brexit approach

Brussels sees outcome as a reality check on timing, renegotiation and Irish backstop

Donald Tusk, left, EU Council president, is said to have taken a more hardline position on Brexit than Jean-
Alex Barker in Brussels
yesterday
Print this page
The House of Commons vote against Theresa May's Brexit deal is not just a historic blow for the British prime minister; it is also a moment of reckoning for the longstanding EU strategy on the UK's exit from the bloc.
Since Britain's referendum vote in 2016, the EU has largely acted as if there were no fundamental choice between arranging the UK's orderly exit and maintaining the unity and integrity of the European project. The onus was on Britain to yield.
The sheer scale of the defeat of the draft Brexit deal — a 585-page doorstopper treaty painstakingly negotiated over 18 months— throws that approach into doubt, forcing both sides to revisit their ideas of what is politically feasible in the coming months.
Hosuk Lee-Makiyama, a former EU trade official now heading the European Centre for International Political Economy, said the draft deal was a Pyrrhic victory for the bloc. EU negotiators secured highly favourable terms from Britain but "risk losing because it cannot be ratified", he said. "The ball is definitely in the EU court."
Brussels will insist London take the initiative in the aftermath of the vote. But senior EU officials at the heart of the negotiation see the result as a reality check on three fronts: Britain's scheduled March 29 exit date; the durability of a draft agreement previously billed as a "best and last" offer; and the question of how to manage the impact of a no-deal Brexit on the Northern Ireland border, the most contentious topic.
Recommended



Instant Insight Robert Shrimsley
May's loss points to a Brexit delay
With so much up in the air, a minority in Brussels is now asking whether the EU's focus should now be more focused on avoiding Brexit altogether.
The initial response
While nerves over Brexit have grown in some European capitals, the response will depend on how Mrs May fares after the vote. Jean-Claude Juncker, the commission president, tweeted of his "regret" at the defeat. "I urge the UK to clarify its intentions as soon as possible," he said. "Time is almost up."
The bloc is expected to accelerate no-deal preparations, but Donald Tusk, the European Council president, and many member states are reluctant to call a special summit on Brexit before "the dust has settled" in Westminster, according to one senior diplomat.
Rather than gamble on a summit with "nothing to discuss", the EU side wants negotiations to develop so that any British demands for revisions are both clear and plausible. "The worst thing for everyone will be a European Council that slides into disagreement and more chaos," said a second EU diplomat.
The Brexit timeline
Hardly a diplomat is left working on Brexit who believes March 29 will be Britain's departure day. A significant shift occurred over the Christmas break, as Martin Selmayr, the commission's top civil servant, began exploring legal avenues to prolong the process, according to senior EU officials.
This is partly because Mrs May's negotiators privately made clear that if her government's attempts to win a "meaningful vote" on her deal ran into the new year, Britain would be unable to pass all the ratification legislation required before the end of March. Even in a no-deal scenario, both sides expect to extend the date to allow for preparations.
The open question is not if but when Britain asks for an extension. If Mrs May retains the authority to pursue a second vote on her deal in coming weeks — after seeking relatively minor revisions — she may not want to ease the pressure of an impending deadline.
By contrast, a request for a more fundamental renegotiation — or indeed time for a second referendum or an election — would need to be accompanied by a UK request for an extension.
Views have recently shifted within the EU on how to respond. On Tuesday night French President Emmanuel Macron suggested that the UK would ultimately need to take more time. EU leaders are likely to approve an extension until July 1, even if it is primarily to cope with political gridlock in Britain. "If she asks for one she gets one," said a senior EU official involved in Brexit. "That is what has changed." Some political conditions are likely to be attached.
One camp of EU officials see merit in a longer extension, potentially going on to the end of the year, to give Britain time "for the fever to break". But this runs up against a big political obstacle: the need for Britain to elect MEPs to the new European Parliament before its first session in July. Lawyers have been asked to look for workarounds, but no bulletproof answers have been found.
The renegotiation
Negotiators had seen the "most dangerous" outcome for the EU as being a narrow defeat for Mrs May in the Commons vote, which would have given the UK prime minister leverage to seek surgical but significant changes to the withdrawal treaty.
Her devastating loss in Westminster suggests much broader changes may be needed to secure parliament's approval.
The most obvious "surgical" change would, in effect, set an end-date to the backstop plan to avoid a hard border on the island of Ireland. The backstop is loathed by Brexiters, who see it as a "trap" that could keep the UK in a customs union with the EU for years.
Some member states have no qualms with the concept of time-limiting the backstop. But they want any compromise to emerge from Ireland; there remains no desire to publicly overrule Leo Varadkar, the Irish premier.
Mr Varadkar has made clear to Berlin and Paris that he would prefer a no-deal to a time-limited backstop, according to people familiar with the conversations. "He can blame the Brits for the mess," said one.

[haranguerer]

No deal looks v unlikely once we've gotten into the zone where the date is more flexible than first stated. Everyone wants a deal (even those claiming not to)

[gallsman]

She'll win the no confidence motion, rightly so too. Corbyn would make an even bigger mess of things and everyone beyond some of his sycophantic inner circle know it.

In fairness, they probably know it too and just pretend otherwise.

Voting against her yesterday and for her today is incoherent
The Eurosceptics want a weak PM but other Tories do not

It's not incoherent as they're voting on two completely separate topics

[manfromdelmonte]

Any chance the Shinners might take their seats?

the useless feckers

[screenexile]

Any chance the Shinners might take their seats?

the useless feckers

Get up off there arse and represent their constituents??!! Some chance.

[Kickham csc]

Any chance the Shinners might take their seats?

the useless feckers

Get up off there arse and represent their constituents??!! Some chance.

Guys, it's their policy, which is published and they get a mandate to implement it during election time. They still work the system and lobby in Westminster, but won't take their seats due to having to take an oath.

I can't believe that after 20 years, the SDLP haven't been able to capitalize on this issue. Instead of snipping at Sinn Fein, this is the one issue that they need to be focusing on to pull voters over to them.

Looking big picture, Sinn Fien's votes don't matter. They have representation in the Dail and EU, so they are still influencing the process.

[north_antrim_hound]

And what good has the SDLP's presence done over the years for nationalist here especially when the tories were in power. How many posters on here if they were starting a new job first port of call is the swear allegiance to the British Crown. If you don't like SF policy on the matter then don't vote for them. Seems the the majority of Irish nationalist in the north don't have a problem with abstinence.
All the disfunctions and pantomime that's gone on in parliament this last few months and all some people can think of is that on a Brexit thread.

[trailer]

And what good has the SDLP's presence done over the years for nationalist here especially when the tories were in power. How many posters on here if they were starting a new job first port of call is the swear allegiance to the British Crown. If you don't like SF policy on the matter then don't vote for them. Seems the the majority of Irish nationalist in the north don't have a problem with abstinence.
All the disfunctions and pantomime that's gone on in parliament this last few months and all some people can think of is that on a Brexit thread.

So bringing peace to the North and saving countless lives has done nothing for Nationalist?

Muppet.

[north_antrim_hound]

And what good has the SDLP's presence done over the years for nationalist here especially when the tories were in power. How many posters on here if they were starting a new job first port of call is the swear allegiance to the British Crown. If you don't like SF policy on the matter then don't vote for them. Seems the the majority of Irish nationalist in the north don't have a problem with abstinence.
All the disfunctions and pantomime that's gone on in parliament this last few months and all some people can think of is that on a Brexit thread.

So bringing peace to the North and saving countless lives has done nothing for Nationalist?

Muppet.

Their presence in Westminster fellow muppet. I respect the SDLP more than you respect SF but while we are on the subject do you think SF had nothing to do with the current peace we are enjoying. I never voted SF during that period because I am opposed to violence. You sound more like a Dupper than any sort of nationalist.

[Walter Cronc]

No Irish party (Nationalist or Unionist) makes one iota at Westminster.

Sure look at the number of SNP members that effectively don't matter.

My gripe with SF is they appear to be doing sweet FA here to get things back on track.

[north_antrim_hound]

No Irish party (Nationalist or Unionist) makes one iota at Westminster.

Sure look at the number of SNP members that effectively don't matter.

My gripe with SF is they appear to be doing sweet FA here to get things back on track.

I would agree on that for sure, and they next time they come canvassing I will be giving them an earful on it. As for their abstention in Westminster I couldn't gave a rats ass.

[haranguerer]

No Irish party (Nationalist or Unionist) makes one iota at Westminster.

Sure look at the number of SNP members that effectively don't matter.

My gripe with SF is they appear to be doing sweet FA here to get things back on track.

They managed to come to an agreement with the DUP only for it to be vetoed by those behind the DUP. Hard to know what you can do when those you're negotiating with don't appear to have any say. What would you have them do?