Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Brexit Deal Fails in Parliament

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

521–530 of 1001 posts

Re: Brexit Deal Fails in Parliament

#521

Post by kansface »

tunesmith wrote: post #8
Someone1234 wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just to be clear, article 50 hasn't been revoked, the UK will still leave the EU with no deal on March 30th. This vote is very damaging to the government's position, but as it stands there's been no move, assurance, or guarantees, to stop article 50. If article 50 is activated it starts a two year countdown as the UK slowly moves out of the EU. Even if the government loses the no confidence vote, there's still no imp…

What I don't understand (and I am very ignorant!) is why the initial vote can't just be looked at as a stage in the decision process. Time has gone on, and the public has become more educated as to what the true effects of Brexit will be. Even leaving aside the question of how dishonest the pro-Brexit arguments were. It just seems reasonable to have another vote.

Just like science - run the experiment until you get the right results to publish!

Re: Brexit Deal Fails in Parliament

#522

Post by macintux »

djmobley wrote: post #517
rtkwe wrote: post #457

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't see the contradiction here. Remain was what it says on the tin stay in the EU and any desired changes happen within the system of the EU. My whole point is the leave has gone from this huge nebula of different brexits to one, the one currently negotiated by PM May. Ideally if it were possible the vote should have never been held until there was an actual deal or at least a concrete foundation. Without the act…

> Remain was what it says on the tin stay in the EU and any desired changes happen within the system of the EU. That's simply not true. Both remain and leave campaigns were backed up by dubious or misleading claims about what the future would look like if the UK voted to leave the EU. Those backing remain claimed Brexit would cause financial instability and require an emergency budget, that unemployment would rise, t…

> None of these things happened.

Well, Brexit hasn’t occurred yet, so only Cameron’s departure has put the lie to any of Remain’s arguments.

Re: Brexit Deal Fails in Parliament

#523

Post by growlist »

clappski wrote: post #491
growlist wrote: post #477

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you honestly think it is healthy for democracy if the UK is forced into remaining?

Forced into remaining by a second democratic referendum, held due to the uncovering of lies and nebulous accounting of the leave campaign that the full extent of hasn’t been fully uncovered?

There was FUD on both sides!

Re: Brexit Deal Fails in Parliament

#524

Post by 1ris »

andrewmcwatters wrote: post #402
mattlondon wrote: post #347

Earlier quoted context omitted.

16 year olds can get married, join the military, work fulltime and pay income tax. Why shouldn't they also be allowed to vote?

You know what, you're right. We should extend all 18-21 privileges to 16 years of age across all developed nations and call 16+ aged individuals adults. Because after all, they're fully developed persons capable of the same level of rational thought and emotional separation as those at 18 through 21 years of age and beyond. So, age of adulthood: 16. Age of consent: 16. Age of military draft eligibility: 16. Subsequen…

Just as children are expected to pay maintenance for their parents when they are as adults in care homes, its reasonable to expect parents to pay maintenance for their children when they are getting educated. Its unrelated to being a adult. Besides that, you are right.

Re: Brexit Deal Fails in Parliament

#525

Post by mikekchar »

gonehome wrote: post #55
yholio wrote: post #41

The Brexit promise is something nobody can deliver on. It was a lie, you cannot force the EU to accept an unfavorable trade deal. If only for the reason that it would set an exceptionally bad precedent and everybody would want their own deal, to pick and choose the parts of EU membership that are favorable to them, leading the EU to implode. Somebody needs to own up to that lie and accept that a "no deal" outcome, wh…

Maybe? If you think that most of the people are actually looking at or arguing about the implementation of any specific policy (I'd suspect this is the minority). It seems more likely people are just arguing about which tribe they're a part of. In that case nobody cares about what the best outcome is or what the truth is. If you can get a brexit deal passed that still allows the UK to 'brexit' in name only, but other…

I don't think what you are saying is correct. Rhetoric aside, I think there are 2 main reasons for leaving: 1. greater autonomy in deciding on laws (especially wrt things like immigration policy), 2. withdrawal of the financial contribution to Europe.

Many "remain" people specifically oppose these 2 reasons. They want the European oversight on laws. One of the main reasons for a European Union is to ensure that these kinds of laws are harmonised across Europe. Also, "remain" people feel that the UK actually receives more value than they pay for their European contributions. Specifically, the cost of bureaucracy is necessary to ensure that the UK has a voice in European decision making. They feel that in a "no deal" situation, Europe (being bigger and stronger) will simply dictate the conditions of every agreement.

I do remote work for a UK company, though I live in Japan, so I can see this from a slightly removed position (though, please note that I've been hurt economically from the weak pound since Brexit, so I still have a vested interest!) I sympathise with the "leave" goals, but I think the "remain" camp has it right. Brexit is going to cost the UK a lot IMHO and there is no way to have a "pretend leave" that satisfies the "leave" side. The UK may have some extra autonomy after leaving, but the cost will be that they will be tossed around by Europe on virtually every front with no power to respond. Economically, it will also be extremely expensive -- something the market seems to agree with me on, given the state of the pound since the referendum.

Re: Brexit Deal Fails in Parliament

#526

Post by growlist »

tim333 wrote: post #505
growlist wrote: post #463

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The point is that in the alternate scenario there wouldn't be half the establishment or more agitating to subvert the democratic will of the largest vote ever in British history, I guess..

There's something to be said for a bias towards the status quo. If it ain't broke don't fix it and all that. If the vote had been 60-40 leave I'd agree with you but it was close to 50/50 and based on some misinformation.

I'll just make the point once again: more people voted for Brexit than have voted for anything else in the UK, ever.

Re: Brexit Deal Fails in Parliament

#527

Post by Krasnol »

growlist wrote: post #433
rtkwe wrote: post #270

The issue with the referendum since the beginning was leave was such a nebulous cloud for the entire range of Brexit from barely-there-Brexit to Britian-stands-alone(-get-those-people-out)-Brexit while remain had a very definite meaning. Because of that everyone could pour all their displeasure at anything wrong into leave and think the deal would take care of it. That's why I'm always annoyed at the 'another referen…

Edit: I got a bit carried away.

If the vote had gone the other way, the results of that would have been clear from the beginning. It would have been what the UK had. It would have been a reasonable result.

The Brexit result people voted for was an illusion (others call it lies).

So why not let the people vote on the actual results now?

The only reason I see is the fear of the Brexiters that they would fail in a spectacular way after all those failures they delivered since the vote went through.

Re: Brexit Deal Fails in Parliament

#528

Post by tick_tock_tick »

jpfr wrote: post #466
lurquer wrote: post #396

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Corpses in the street? The UK imports around 25% of food-related commodities from the EU. Even with no deal, these imports will continue (as the EU has to sell them to someone.) Even if the EU stopped, there would not be corpses in the street as there happens to be a very wealthy English-speaking country not too far away that happens to produce more food than any country on the planet and is more than willing to trad…

> The US is currently only the 10th largest exporter of food to the UK. “For the USA to replace the combined food imports from the other nine in the top 10 would require a vast food flotilla and logistics operation exceeding that of the 1940-45 Atlantic convoys.” https://www.theguardian.com/food/2018/sep/15/food-and-brexit...

Damn that's crazy so it's completely viable? With the increasing in ships and logistical systems it would be even easier then it was back in the day.

Re: Brexit Deal Fails in Parliament

#529

Post by Tomte »

jandrese wrote: post #391
jcriddle4 wrote: post #215

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For many Pro-Brexit people they felt May's deal didn't really leave the EU. A very major sticking point is that provisions in the exit agreement, refereed to as the "backstop", that in theory and possibly in practice could legally trap the UK in a half completed transition deal forever with the UK always subject to EU rules. Overall the agreement May put forward is basically an agreement to start the next phase of ne…

My understanding from Brussels is that there is no second phase of negotiations. They just voted for a hard Brexit.

There can even be no extension of Article 50 for more than a few weeks, because we're electing the European Parliament in May. If the UK is still in the EU by then they need to elect MEPs, as well.

But their seats have already been agreed to be distributed to smaller countries who were underrepresented so far.

It would be a complete clusterfuck, including doubts whether any legislative action would survive court, if the UK isn't properly represented (either because they don't care anymore and don't hold elections, or they simply cannot organize elections on such short notice).

Re: Brexit Deal Fails in Parliament

#530

Post by hardlianotion »

dv_dt wrote: post #451
hardlianotion wrote: post #429

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I can never understand why no-deal v remain appears to be a reasonable position. A normal response to a closely contested referendum carried out the way this one was would be to find some consensus within parliament for how brexit could be delivered, _then_ enact article 50 to withdraw. The current prime minister not only kept all opposition parties away from deliberations on how to proceed, but kept her own minister…

> Even now, forms of brexit based on remaining in the EEA have a great chance of having parliamentary support. But that's not the deal with the EU and there is no time left to negotiate this I thought. Can you perhaps explain more? Is it that you think May actually cheated the electorate that wanted Brexit? I though she was essentially on the side of Brexit?

Cheating - no. May is simply the wrong politician to have put in charge at this time. She is secretive and seems not to understand the people making up her own party, let alone parliament.

Time is short, but if there were some move toward EEA-based , I bet means would be made for an extension. These deadlines are essentially artificial, after all, and it is not only the UK that will be badly damaged if a deal is not reached.

Post reply on HN