Good old Jezza has said he will not hold talks with Theresa May until she rules out a no-deal Brexit.
But surely that's an impossible thing to guarantee as who can predict how the house will vote on any altered deal. There are so many ways to exit and there are many who do not want to exit. Will it ever be possible to agree a deal that is in the country's best interest and gains enough support.
Also, the threat of No-Deal is something that can be used in negotiations with the EU. Their strong stance has been possible as they believe we'd never take a No Deal. But, No-Deal would be very harmful to the EU also, their worst case scenario.
So to take it totally off the table gives the EU no reason whatsoever to agree to anything we ever propose which would ultimately lead to their objective of us not actually leaving.
Similarly the mooted extension to Article 50. Time is a factor in negotiations, particularly a solid deadline, just like a transfer window. It forces parties to move from their starting position. Keep extending it and there is no incentive to actually change ones negotiating stance.
The threat of No Deal and the firm deadline has to stay, to provide a genuine alternative that should inspire those involved to reach agreement.
How can you rule out No Deal Brexit....
posted on 19/1/19
the £39 billion is a negotiated sum, payable if a withdrawal agreement is applied.
both sides agree that.
both sides have publicly used that statement.
the wording implies that the sum could be different to what we've already committed to in the eu budgets.
it also implies that the sum may not be applicable if there is no deal.
so there is ambiguity, and with ambiguity there is always room for dispute.
obviously, the eu's stance will be that £39 billion (or more with no deal) is payable no matter what.
the uk has received multiple reports from various legal teams with differing opinions on what it's legally obliged to pay, ranging from the full amount, to nothing.
therefore, until the uk decides which course of action to take regarding the £39B, it's a moot point.
we may CHOOSE to pay it. we may CHOOSE to just not pay it. at which point, we either challenge the 'obligation' in court ourselves, or just wait to see if the eu takes us to court over it.
our legal obligations will only be determined when we either start paying ( where payment will be seen as us admitting to our obligation) or when a series of court actions has definitively determined it.
we neither know the full contents of the contracts signed, and legal teams that do have obviously found some potential get-outs. arguing about it on here resolves nothing.
as for consequences of not paying, also completely unknowable, it would depend on the circumstances of how we choose not to pay and the judges ruling statements on any court cases arising from any non-payment. and therefore, also completely pointless arguing about at this point.
posted on 19/1/19
comment by 19th title coming soon. (U12879)
posted 1 hour, 50 minutes ago
the £39 billion is a negotiated sum, payable if a withdrawal agreement is applied.
both sides agree that.
both sides have publicly used that statement.
the wording implies that the sum could be different to what we've already committed to in the eu budgets.
it also implies that the sum may not be applicable if there is no deal.
so there is ambiguity, and with ambiguity there is always room for dispute.
obviously, the eu's stance will be that £39 billion (or more with no deal) is payable no matter what.
the uk has received multiple reports from various legal teams with differing opinions on what it's legally obliged to pay, ranging from the full amount, to nothing.
therefore, until the uk decides which course of action to take regarding the £39B, it's a moot point.
we may CHOOSE to pay it. we may CHOOSE to just not pay it. at which point, we either challenge the 'obligation' in court ourselves, or just wait to see if the eu takes us to court over it.
our legal obligations will only be determined when we either start paying ( where payment will be seen as us admitting to our obligation) or when a series of court actions has definitively determined it.
we neither know the full contents of the contracts signed, and legal teams that do have obviously found some potential get-outs. arguing about it on here resolves nothing.
as for consequences of not paying, also completely unknowable, it would depend on the circumstances of how we choose not to pay and the judges ruling statements on any court cases arising from any non-payment. and therefore, also completely pointless arguing about at this point.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Well well well
Ambiguity it would appear does exist as does the potential prospect of a challenge.
Hmmm
And here are all the self proclaimed “legal” experts all over this thread claiming “facts” whilst completely ignoring the options of legal processes. So much so they have to resort to childish insults. Like that makes them right
I think it’s time to change my energy supplier
posted on 19/1/19
comment by 19th title coming soon. (U12879)
posted 1 hour, 59 minutes ago
the £39 billion is a negotiated sum, payable if a withdrawal agreement is applied.
both sides agree that.
both sides have publicly used that statement.
the wording implies that the sum could be different to what we've already committed to in the eu budgets.
it also implies that the sum may not be applicable if there is no deal.
so there is ambiguity, and with ambiguity there is always room for dispute.
obviously, the eu's stance will be that £39 billion (or more with no deal) is payable no matter what.
the uk has received multiple reports from various legal teams with differing opinions on what it's legally obliged to pay, ranging from the full amount, to nothing.
therefore, until the uk decides which course of action to take regarding the £39B, it's a moot point.
we may CHOOSE to pay it. we may CHOOSE to just not pay it. at which point, we either challenge the 'obligation' in court ourselves, or just wait to see if the eu takes us to court over it.
our legal obligations will only be determined when we either start paying ( where payment will be seen as us admitting to our obligation) or when a series of court actions has definitively determined it.
we neither know the full contents of the contracts signed, and legal teams that do have obviously found some potential get-outs. arguing about it on here resolves nothing.
as for consequences of not paying, also completely unknowable, it would depend on the circumstances of how we choose not to pay and the judges ruling statements on any court cases arising from any non-payment. and therefore, also completely pointless arguing about at this point.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Where did you read and pull that from?
posted on 19/1/19
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/nov/29/brexit-divorce-bill-how-much-is-it-and-what-is-it-for
It can't be done away with as the Uk has already benefitted and has obligations to it. Theres no cooling off period.
Pure fantasy that it is not due or won't be enforced
posted on 19/1/19
comment by Redinthehead - FreeGaza - فلسطين (U1860)
posted 27 minutes ago
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/nov/29/brexit-divorce-bill-how-much-is-it-and-what-is-it-for
It can't be done away with as the Uk has already benefitted and has obligations to it. Theres no cooling off period.
Pure fantasy that it is not due or won't be enforced
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Again why do you continue to state these things as fact and that nothing can ever be challenged and indeed successfully challenged.
That makes absolutely no sense. It’s as if you’re staying as fact that this is enshrouded in something akin to the US constitution.
Even that is challenge almost on a daily basis!
posted on 19/1/19
so you say that report is wrong? while taking someones comments especially those from politicians mouths as gospel?
no point arguing with that then.
posted on 19/1/19
comment by Just Shoot (U10408)
posted 3 hours, 32 minutes ago
Corbyn not understanding how negotiations work. You enter, then negotiate. Not demand, toys out of the pram. The man is a clown.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
A clown ?
After inviting politicians from all parties to come and speak to her, Theresa May has spent to days telling them she ain't budging on her 'dead deal'.
Corbyn knew she was full of 5h1t, so call her bluff from minute one, save wasting time.
She has also been ringing around EU members pretty much trying to tout the deal that has just been slaughtered.
The woman is a fvcking beligerent basketcase.
posted on 19/1/19
comment by Redinthehead - FreeGaza - فلسطين (U1860)
posted 6 minutes ago
so you say that report is wrong? while taking someones comments especially those from politicians mouths as gospel?
no point arguing with that then.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
What?
Where did I say it was wrong? Why do you continue to make stuff up by suggesting I’ve said things I haven’t?
You just flatly refuse to accept that there could easily be a legal challenge taken through many different levels and it could potentially be negotiated down, scrapped or enforced.
You’re no legal expert. You refer to some ruling. Was this in a court of law or was it just opinion?
I’ve never claimed to know yet you continue to espouse “fact” after “fact” and have put yourself into a position where you can’t back it up with anything other than your opinions based on others opinions.
There’s no “fact” there. None at all so stop trying to pretend you know what will happen because shock and horror; you don’t.
You’ve no idea so you can’t rule anything out.
Is this the time to bring in my energy provider again for you?
posted on 19/1/19
comment by jlou1978 (U15376)
posted 21 minutes ago
comment by Just Shoot (U10408)
posted 3 hours, 32 minutes ago
Corbyn not understanding how negotiations work. You enter, then negotiate. Not demand, toys out of the pram. The man is a clown.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
A clown ?
After inviting politicians from all parties to come and speak to her, Theresa May has spent to days telling them she ain't budging on her 'dead deal'.
Corbyn knew she was full of 5h1t, so call her bluff from minute one, save wasting time.
She has also been ringing around EU members pretty much trying to tout the deal that has just been slaughtered.
The woman is a fvcking beligerent basketcase.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Corbyn has been asking her face to face over the despatch box for a cross party group, but nooooo, she wants to show shes strong and stable and has 'got this'...
now wants conversations in private.. fack that have the talks, debate and consensus in public.
It is the lives of the ordinary person that will be affected more than any politician.
posted on 19/1/19
comment by Redinthehead - FreeGaza - فلسطين (U1860)
posted 6 minutes ago
comment by jlou1978 (U15376)
posted 21 minutes ago
comment by Just Shoot (U10408)
posted 3 hours, 32 minutes ago
Corbyn not understanding how negotiations work. You enter, then negotiate. Not demand, toys out of the pram. The man is a clown.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
A clown ?
After inviting politicians from all parties to come and speak to her, Theresa May has spent to days telling them she ain't budging on her 'dead deal'.
Corbyn knew she was full of 5h1t, so call her bluff from minute one, save wasting time.
She has also been ringing around EU members pretty much trying to tout the deal that has just been slaughtered.
The woman is a fvcking beligerent basketcase.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Corbyn has been asking her face to face over the despatch box for a cross party group, but nooooo, she wants to show shes strong and stable and has 'got this'...
now wants conversations in private.. fack that have the talks, debate and consensus in public.
It is the lives of the ordinary person that will be affected more than any politician.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Agreed