Is Britain about to leave the EU?

[Lohrenswald]

Is there really german elections next year?

Time flies...

 

[Silurian]

There are a few elections coming up as well as France and Germany next year such as Dutch March 17, also Czech, Hungarian, Slovenian in 17; Italy feb 18, Sweden Sep 18, Austria 18.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_next_general_elections#Europe

Ever country has a veto on the negotiations, so their elections will affect the negotiations.

 

[JohannaK]

Don't forget Spain on Dec. 25 this year! (most probably)

 

[Arakhor]

A Catholic country holding elections on Christmas Day??

Yes, the Houses of Parliament will probably try to renege on carrying through Brexit and then there may be some sort of revolution from the people.

I think that's unlikely, to say the least. It's just not British, is it?

 

[JohannaK]

You see, low voter turnout favours the PP. Also, they use the date to bully the opposition leader by arguing that if he does not allow a PP government it will be the PSOE's fault for an election on Christmas Day. I've also heard that if push came to shove there will be an ad hoc modification of the electoral law to shorten the cycle between the dissolution of Parliament and the actual election, so that it can take place on the 18th instead.

I kind of want elections on Christmas Day though. It will be so horrible, it might wake up the people.

 

[AdrienIer]

I kind of want elections on Christmas Day though. It will be so horrible, it might wake up the people.

Most likely people will just vote for whoever has the most chances of having a majority. Which is probably the PP.

 

[JohannaK]

I fully expect PP voters to stay home with families, becaue it's bloody Christmas Day, though.

 

[Truronian]

I think that's unlikely, to say the least. It's just not British, is it?

Both aspects of that scenario look remarkably unlikely. The Commons are not going to vote a decent Brexit plan for fears of seeming undemocratic, and even if they did there won't be rioting on the streets as only half the country wants it anyway.

 

[Arakhor]

First, of course, we'd actually need a plan, decent or otherwise.

 

[Traitorfish]

Yes, the Houses of Parliament will probably try to renege on carrying through
Brexit and then there may be some sort of revolution from the people.

On the basis of a slim plurality in a non-binding consultation? That seems a touch dramatic.

 

[Arakhor]

Don't forget the politician who said, "In a 52-48 referendum, this would be unfinished business by a long way."

 

[Takhisis]

After WW2 there was a debate on what to do about the "german problem": how to prevent germany from starting another war. The US originally proposed dismantling german industry wholesale, giving the Saar to France and part of the Rhineland to the Netherlands.

Good post, but I believe it was "during WW2" rather than "after WW2".

The peace treaties were only signed in the 1950s…

Don't forget Spain on Dec. 25 this year! (most probably)

And what about Catalunye?

 

[innonimatu]

As had West Germany under Willy Brandt. It was quite unpopular with German conservatives. I seriously don't know where you get your 'information'.

I actually read up on the stuff. Unlike you. But I've told you where to read it. The 1970 treaty was a temporary settlement where the FRG did not renounce a revision of the terms in the final peace treaty. That was why the issue came to the front before the treaty of settlement. What do you think all those diplomatic meetings and controversies in 1990 were about?

On the basis of a slim plurality in a non-binding consultation? That seems a touch dramatic.

You never know what will set off the pent-up frustration, but periodically something does...

 

[uppi]

I actually read up on the stuff. Unlike you. But I've told you where to read it. The 1970 treaty was a temporary settlement where the FRG did not renounce a revision of the terms in the final peace treaty. That was why the issue came to the front before the treaty of settlement. What do you think all those diplomatic meetings and controversies in 1990 were about?

You are wrong:

Die Bundesrepublik Deutschland und die Volksrepublik Polen stellen übereinstimmend
fest, daß die bestehende Grenzlinie, deren Verlauf im Kapitel IX der Beschlüsse der
Potsdamer Konferenz vom 2. August 1945 von der Ostsee unmittelbar westlich von
Swinemünde und von dort die Oder entlang bis zur Einmündung der Lausitzer Neiße
und die Lausitzer Neiße entlang bis zur Grenze mit der Tschechoslowakei festgelegt
worden ist, die westliche Staatsgrenze der Volksrepublik Polen bildet.
Sie bekräftigen die Unverletzlichkeit ihrer bestehenden Grenzen jetzt und in der Zukunft
und verpflichten sich gegenseitig zur uneingeschränkten Achtung ihrer territorialen
Integrität.

The bold roughly translates to:
[The FRG and Poland] affirm the inviolableness of the existing borders, now and in future.

 

[JohannaK]

And what about Catalunye?

They say possibly next summer.

 

[Agent327]

Thanks, uppi.

I actually read up on the stuff. Unlike you.

I seriously doubt you looked anything up. It may surprise you to know I was alive witnessing these events. You seem to assume as much about me as about your supposed knowledge. Which is why you repeatedly have to be corrected - but unlike you seem to think, that says more about you than it does about me.

 

[Lohrenswald]

You are wrong:


The bold roughly translates to:
[The FRG and Poland] affirm the inviolableness of the existing borders, now and in future.

Sure, but where and when is this from?

 

[FriendlyFire]

The people who did vote that way probably will be confused, yes.

All the Leavers promises made as its been put are "impossible"

Someone needs to tell the Leavers to make up their minds. You cannot have more immigration and less immigration at the same time. You cannot have more money to spend while ending passporting resulting in less money. You cant have free trade agreement without free movement. Might well be workable for the UK to stay inside the EU at this stage, if the EU can provide some concessions. And the UK can actually stop blaming the EU for problems which have nothing to do with the EU.

The former deputy prime minister said he was convinced the rest of the EU would accept some form of "emergency brake" on migrants if Britain agreed to "play by the rules" of that market.

But, he said, pro-Brexit Tory MPs were more obsessed by restoring sovereignty than they were about immigration – which left the prime minister in an “impossible position”.

“Those two things are mutually incompatible – it is impossible to resolve. You cannot paper over that tension.”

Mr Clegg also said the Article 50 process would only cover Britain’s exit from the EU, with suggestions that our future trading arrangements could be decided in that two-year period a “total pipe dream”.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...t-deal-eu-tory-mps-conservative-a7249821.html

 

[Verbose]

Sure, but where and when is this from?

Warsaw Treaty, 1970?
http://www.documentarchiv.de/brd/1970/warschauer-vertrag.html

 

[EnglishEdward]

I think that's unlikely, to say the least. It's just not British, is it?

We shall see.

Both aspects of that scenario look remarkably unlikely. The Commons are not going to vote a decent Brexit plan for fears of seeming undemocratic, and even if they did there won't be rioting on the streets as only half the country wants it anyway.

We shall see.

On the basis of a slim plurality in a non-binding consultation? That seems a touch dramatic.

Representative democracy is a substitute for direct democracy because the
UK is too big for citizens to walk to the city of London (cf ancient Athens) and
vote in person, so the referendum was rather more than a consultation.

The slim plurality primarily reflects that the UK politicians took the UK into the
European Union without consultation, and only conceded a public vote afterwards.

If the UK public had voted at the same time as France and Eire, there would,
in my opinion, likely have been a 70-75% vote against joining the EU.

The EU Commission and Chancellor Merkel know this full well, which is why they
promptly responded by suggesting the UK apply to leave according to Article 50.
Some of them want to proceed with further integration and see no benefit in
having the UK remain in the EU against its peoples wishes to obstruct things.

It is worth considering why Remainers voted to Remain.

Some of the Remain voters may have voted Remain because (a) they wished to
avoid uncertainty, but we already have that and are adjusting to it while (b)
others disliked the personalities, policies and style of Boris, Michael and Nigel,
and maybe feared them becoming Prime Minister, but those three are gone.
(c) Other Remainers may have voted Remain for reasons of political correctness
because they did not want to be on the same side as xenophobes or rascists;
particularly after the murder of the Labour MP; but if there is hopefully an
absence of ethnic cleansing in the UK; will they remain Remainers? (d) Yet others
personally benefit from working on projects supported by EU grants (UK money
recycled) but after the Leave vote, the money for those will dry up and once
dried up they will no longer fear it drying up and be so inclined to revote Remain.

If there was to be another public vote, then questions about the absence of
a Plan would be applied to the Remainers.

For instance: Are you in favour of:

(a) ever closer union (true believers in the EU project); or
(b) staying in the EU to obstruct that (cynics) like Sir Humphrey explained

The fact is that the pro Remain side was only united in being anti vote Leave.

My view is that the pro Remain campaign ran a very successful scare campaign
enlisting the support of those who had prospered and were cautious of change;
varying from the Governor of the Bank of England, Head of the TUC, to the Arch
Bishop of Canterbury; and deposing leaders in institutions opposed to the EU;
while the mainly middle aged conservative rightish men attracted few swing voters.

It is not clear that the Remain campaign could repeat that.

Certainly those listed above might be permitted or even perhaps told by their
advsers, membership, congregation; to remain neutral in any rerun campaign.

So it is unclear that the Remain vote would hold up if there was another
referendum. And so I doubt that there will be another vote, not because
of Leaver objections but because the pro EU elite will not deem it winnable;
so they will merely continue with procedural obstructionism to Leaving.

This might even drag on until deselection threats start to focus MPs minds.