Cookie Notice

However, this blog is a US service and this site uses cookies from Google to deliver its services and analyze traffic. Your IP address and user-agent are shared with Google along with performance and security metrics to ensure quality of service, generate usage statistics, and to detect and address abuse.

Saturday, 1 December 2018

'No Brexit' becomes a choice

At the G20 Mrs May lined up with the various unelected Presidents of the EU behind their comfortable agreement, no doubt much to the satisfaction of the globalist establishment, as they continued their offensive against the People and Parliament of Britain. Yesterday was supposed to have been about international trade, and I was looking forward to someone explaining why remaining chained to the world's most protectionist trade block, which has sclerotic growth, a doomed currency union, and is being outperformed by thrusting, vibrant and free economies across the oceans, would be a good thing for the United Kingdom. It didn't happen, of course.

What did happen was a co-ordinated response between May's team and her EU allies.

First came Liam Fox on Sky, who urged voters to write to ther MPs saying they did not want to see either 'no deal' or 'no Brexit'. Whoaaa there! Where did that come from? Clearly it was not a mistake, for a little later Donald Tusk, an unelected official serving as one of the EU's several Presidents, said MPs will be faced with leaving the European Union without a deal or cancelling Brexit altogether if they reject Theresa May's deal. There it is again. Brexit will be cancelled unless we do as we're told.

So in the past week the Axis forces of May's government and her EU allies have agreed a new attack option. If they don't get their way, they'll cancel the largest and most significant vote ever held in the United Kingdom. 

I've just caught the tail of a news report that Gove has today echoed (in a column in the Remainer rag the Mail) the above - saying if MPs don't accept May's deal, Brexit could be 'called off'. Clearly this now has legs.

The implication is that May is threatening that if she and the EU lose their Commons vote on the 11th, they'll impose another referendum on the UK - and one with 3 options, that splits the Leave vote and is designed to reverse Brexit.


Scrobs. said...

It is noticeable that as Gove has twisted and turned and changed his mind so many times in recent months, that he has made a lot of enemies, and is rapidly becoming subject to 'tumbleweed syndrome'.

Yet another junior minster resigned a few hours ago too! (A Mr Gallileo, an astrologer)...

How many more will escape will be down to their timing up to Black Tuesday!

Cascadian said...

I cannot be bothered by what the "leaders" are saying anymore, their well choreographed lies are un-important.

What does interest me are the obvious cracks forming in the EU collective. Italy has told EU and ECB to fuck-off and the EU and ECB indeed seems to have fucked-off, various EU members are walking away from the UN migrants accord, the French plebs are creating havoc with their yellow-vest protests and the Belgic plebs have even found a backbone and are similarly protesting and burning police vehicles.

And yet the placid brits are subdued, and swallow their daily dose of lies, propoganda and downright mischief, when they should be descending on Ms Dicks London in yellow vests and creating dispersed havoc, one single protest is way too easy to police.

Jack the dog said...

I was foreseeable from the moment lying traitor May said there will be no second referendum that that would be the fall back in the all too likely case of her dismal betrayal being chucked up by her mps.

No brexit is less bad than accepting her betrayal because presumably he muppets in Brussels will make sure that our remaining opt outs and exemptions are removed as punishment which garantees that some future less miserably cravel government can repeat article 50 and complete the process.

Under the Robbins plan of course that particular door is closed.

DeeDee99 said...

The Global Establishment is obviously terrified that if we opt for No Deal the EU will collapse. So British independence and democracy must be completely sacrificed in order to keep The Project together for a few more years.

Treason May has said so many times that she will not call a second Referendum, I think they could only get away with it if they get rid of her first. That's why the EU said they'd extend the Article 50 deadline by a few months ..... to give the Establishment time.

They are creating the perfect conditions for a "civil war."

Stephen J said...

Is it any wonder that they did what they did Raedwald...?

This has nothing to do with ordinary people and their welfare.

It has everything to do with the political types protecting their own personal interests.

Remember, these are the people whose job it is to govern... The governor of any system or machine is a brake, a device that stops things gaining self momentum.

Well that might be fine when we are discussing lumps of metal interacting with hot gases, like steam, but we are not that, neither are we computer models...

Historically, we have always prospered most when we govern ourselves...

When we created America, and India, and Hong Kong, it was only government that ever stopped it...

And here it is again,, in the form of a bunch of globalists that want to hold on to what they have amassed, and they only way they can see of doing it, is by force.

Were he still alive and not as he is currently, spinning in his grave, John Cowperthwaite... would be 103!

Budgie said...

"The implication is that May is threatening that if she and the EU lose their Commons vote on the 11th, they'll impose another referendum on the UK - and one with 3 options, that splits the Leave vote and is designed to reverse Brexit."


Mr Ecks said...

Are we going to take it?

I'm not. I hope none of you will. I will certainly boycott any such vote and would be willing to turn out to wreck Ballot Boxes. If democracy is dead then its dead. The British State will no longer get away with pushing the form of a system of legitimacy they have killed to try and justify tyranny and rule by decree.

It amounts to saying "Fuck Democracy--We the boss class rule". Ok cunts but lets see how well you do without the least shade of legitimacy and a Blubottle "army" that is afraid of its own shadow.

Lets start with a General Strike and non-payment of ALL tax bills. Why should I bow and scrape and pay scum who spit in my eye?

Write to the Tory MPs. Never mind whose MP they are. Tell them what will happen if they try their luck down this road. And be aware that this also pisses on a Corbyn election as well. If democracy is done so are GE results.

jack ketch said...

The last couple of days May has been threatening the remainers with 'if it fails to pass the house there will be a NO DEAL brexit' , now she's gunning for the Leavers with the reverse threat ie 'if the fails to pass then there will be NO Brexit'. Tomorrow or the day after she'll switch things round some more. Back and forth until MPs are too confused, to 'frit', to risk the consequences of May not succeeding. Its actually a good (as in 'effective') technique as she doesn't necessarily need MPs to 'cave in' and discard their 'principles' *Snork* entirely. I haven't done the math (Budgie probably has), but I'd guess she's hoping for lots of 'Abstentions' from her Brexiteer MPs.

Dave_G said...

@DD99 - in order to keep The Project together for a few more years.

We hear this expression a lot..... but no-one seems to want to ask the obvious question - 'to what purpose' (after those 'few more years')?

The EU is, in the opinion of many more learned observers, destined for failure so what are they holding out for? Is there something planned that hasn't reached fruition yet?

As for the next round of attempts to reverse Brexit, the only viable opposition would be to make the case for 'no Brexit' (and a WTO exit) look to be far more preferable than ANY other option.

Starting with avoiding the usual denigration terms like 'crashing out' and 'no deal' etc there are, as we know, SIGNIFICANT advantages to a WTO exit (the WTO themselves refuting many of the claimed problems) and proponents like Tim 'Wetherspoons' Martin make very convincing arguments. The fact that many Brexit voters would happily accept WTO terms - but aren't exactly sure what those terms are/mean - could be levered advantageously if we got the ball rolling early.

And if we also campaigned for people to simply wear a yellow vest to support Brexit/WTO exit it would certainly concentrate Government minds on the POTENTIAL for trouble if they didn't take more notice of us......

The establishment seems to like 'colour revolutions' - when it works to their advantage. Perhaps our own colour revolution will have a similar effect?

Pat said...

The establishment appear to be behaving like '70s union leaders, imagining that strikes and sit ins will preserve both their power and the jobs in unproductive plants. They may sometimes have delayed the end at the cost of making it more painful, but they never preserved a job that way.
The current mob imagine that political manouvring, at which they excel, will be enough to preserve their failing project- after all, that's how it was built. The results will be similar - the end will be delayed but far more painful than necessary.
Whether three questions will split the leave vote rather depends on what the questions are. If they are remain, leave on WTO terms or accept this deal I would expect WTO to win.

Smoking Scot said...

If that is the case, then I look forward to our EU elections in May next year.

Certainly Mr Farage is likely to continue representing us and perhaps Tommy R. But will the other anti EU parties benefit and if so, which ones?

And do I think what caused Brexit will be put to bed for generations. No I do not; this may well be recorded in history books yet to be written as their greatest balls up ever.

Will they create their very own enemy within?

Anonymous said...

Mordaunt has bottled it now.

How I feel for McVey and Raab.

Bill Quango MP said...

In some ways it’s a shame that their isn’t a proper, militant, Brexit movement.
A really , really militant one. That people would join just for the violence of it.

A half dozen no-soapers have already closed London’s bridges and brought traffic to a standstill. With virtual impunity.

Imagine, just 5,000 organised and led protesters. With leadership like a terror group.
(Not to become terrorists. But to have the aim of maximum publicity and maximum damage and fear and destabilisation)

If the working class are the brexiteers, then the number of skips. Scaffolding vans. Removal lorries. Tractors, trucks trailers at their disposal is legion. Block the roads. Drive up and drop off skips and rubble on the bridges. The whole way along.. Then stand in the way. Block parliament’s roads. While the electricians go down and shut off the Westminster underground.

Blockade the fuel refineries agin. And the ports. Just block the motorway. With a Brexit very own twenty mile rolling, go slow, tailback.
Blockade the supermarket and amazon hubs. It’s pretty easy. There are usually only two or three wide, entrances and exits. Turning up at 4am with 100 vehicles seals these hubs off. Refusing to move for even 24 hours would cause not just shortages, but panic buying shortages. Akin to a snow day.

Every Remain constituency office daubed with “traitor!”
All Eu symbols pulled down and discarded.

Workers for Nissan, go to work, and don’t leave.
They stop all work. And say if there is no Brexit the factory will be burned to the ground. Nose, face spite, of course. But so what? No Brexit means no democracy.

Be like the ira. Have the massed and angry mobs running through the streets. While the reasoned “ political wing” demand to speak with the PM and the monarchy. “To end this terrible situation!”

Think how much easier this would be today. On instagram. Facebook etc. Than back In the day.
Give HMG a taste of French Revolution and they will cave. Because they are nowhere near ready to deal with it.
We already know it’s impossible to police spontaneous outbreaks. And any government that uses the military in the uk, is ( for some entirely unfathomable reason) immediately considered defeated.

It would all go wrong, of course.
Some hot heads with pipe bombs. Rent a mobs attacking a mosque or something. Piggybacking terrorists, etc.
But it could be done. Some charismatic leader of the wronged people could do it, for sure.

I could not advocate it. The end result is uncertain. The damage immense. The slip back to the dark days of mob rule 1970s. People would die. Innocents suffer.

But I would like it to happen for just one day.
One extremely brown pants time day for the government.

I’d like Theresa May to see the ITN news as “ordinary people have taken over Manchester, Newcastle, Liverpool, Sunderland, Southampton and many, many more regional and local council offices and are threatening to burn them down unless the PM agrees to an immediate meeting with their leader, MrXxxx. There was no comment from Downing Street but the talk is of a state of emergency being called.”

“Police say the situation is very volatile. There are not enough fire engines to attend the blazes if all of the occupied buildings were ignited. And not enough police to prevent that from happening. So far it is still quiet, but the deadline is just 6 hours away.”

And the pullback closing shot shows a placard, “Theresa you liar! Bet you wished you’d authorised those water cannons now, eh?”

jack ketch said...

In some ways it’s a shame that their isn’t a proper, militant, Brexit movement.

Too many Brexiteers seem to think winning the plebis-cide was enough. From that moment on they have shown a singular lack of will to get off their broad gammon arses and DO something. That which has been 'done' was pitiful and the point where it was embarrassing to watch even as a remainer.

Where is the march of millions through Westminster? Where is the Send-17.5-million-letters-to-MPs website/app/campaign? Where is the Spokesman or woman with passion and a persil white vest?

Thing about the Volkszorn , it might appear spontaneous but it is anything but. It needs leadership, organisation, and above all finance.

mongoose said...

I see that the G20 has now got WTO and its rules in the cross-hairs. Interesting timing.

Cascadian said...

You cannot rely on the MSM to report news, they are all bought-and-paid-for (recent example Daily Mail). Go to YouTube and search "gilets jaunes".

It will make you feel sorry for ParisPlod, as they retreat from one position to another, as BilQ MP says MetPlods blobbymen and women could not sustain this pressure for more than two days.

John Brown said...

Jack the dog said...

"No brexit is less bad than accepting her betrayal because presumably he muppets in Brussels will make sure that our remaining opt outs and exemptions are removed as punishment which garantees that some future less miserably cravel government can repeat article 50 and complete the process."

Article 50 will be removed.

This is our last and only chance until the EU collapses.

Raedwald said...

Watching the Paris protests yesterday was instructive. The 'vests' maintained a distance of about 100m from police lines except for the undulations - pulses like those of an amoeba that brought the two lines closer. Police then maintained the separation using tear gas and, for the first time yesterday, stun grenades. Neither side was interested in direct clashes - there was certainly no attempt at 'kettling' or organised police advances with staves banging shields that are common in the UK.

The 'vests' burned any cars they came across, but when the fires became too fierce and threatened property, retreated to allow the pompiers to tackle the blazes.

What struck me most was the spontaneous mass singing of La Marseillaise, full throated full belt - with the waving of the Tricolour. Like a football crowd, whenever the 'vests' needed to give themselves a pep, someone started "Allons enfants de la Patrie .." and it would quickly swell to fill the street and echo from the buildings. It was moving. If you ever want a taste of it, go to the French House on Dean Street on Bastille Day, where it works much the same way. Learn the bloody words first.

God, the French do these things with such *style*.

Goggles, nse and mouth masks and of course, since Greece, the use of dilute Maalox (regular, not mint) or any other aluminium hydroxide / magnesium hydroxide based antacid was widespread.

So you know what to do. Halfords for your vest (£4.99) and Boots for the antacid - dilute it and carry in a squirty bottle. Then book a Eurostar ticket ... for as comments above, I doubt whether we will see anything similar in London.

Budgie said...

Smoking Scot said: "If that is the case, then I look forward to our EU elections in May next year."

Unfortunately not. The "transition" (implementation period) specified in the DWA is the bypass for an extension under Art 50 - it saves getting the agreement of the 28 sub-states. And it certainly saves the Tories from the embarrassment of losing next May's euro elections.

The EU, and now our own Remain establishment, always bends the rules. Always. As Juncker said: "When it becomes serious, you have to lie."

Dave_G said...

10's of thousands of people simply WEARING a yellow vest should be enough warning for the Government.

They just need to be seen.

Edward Spalton said...

To anyone with a nodding acquaintance of the EU it was obvious that Mrs May’s objectives, set out in her Lancaster House speech of January 2017 were unobtainable. Yet her ministers were behaving like adolescents, chortling that we would “ have our cake and eat it” -
that is obtain “frictionless access” to the Single market whilst being a “third country” outside the EU and EEA. Even countries with FTAs do not get to bypass the non tariff barriers- sanitary and phytosanitary checks, compliance with technical standards etc.
But her clottish courtiers believed (or said they believed) that this must happen “ because they sell more to us than we do to them” - a refrain heard at provincial activists’ meetings for twenty years. After trying and failing to put them right on this, our experienced ambassador to Brussels resigned.

Another thing Mrs May said (and repeated) was “ No deal is better than a bad deal”. Knowing a little of the border regulations, I doubted that.
But Mrs May has produced a deal so bad, I now believe it to be true although I think that the “ultras” of the ERG group are wildly over-optimistic and I cannot see it happening without considerable disruption and inevitable increased unemployment . I hope I am proved wrong about that but prior experience of the changeover to the Common Agricultural Policy gave me an idea of how it all worked and suggests otherwise.

Another of Mrs May’s sayings was that she would avoid an agreement that put us in “purgatory”. Well, purgatory is a state from which you eventually are released. But this agreement looks as if it could be permanent. That’s Hell not Purgatory. So perhaps she quietens her conscience with that thought. She was not lying only misleading those ready to be misled.

Budgie said...

Edward Spalton said: "Even countries with FTAs do not get to bypass the non tariff barriers- sanitary and phytosanitary checks, compliance with technical standards etc." No state, even EU states, can bypass those standards.

Trade is done by businesses selling goods and services, not by government. Every business everywhere has to comply with the standards, and specifications, demanded by the buyer. Some of those are idiosyncratic, and others are the law of the land. Given that, exactly who said we could bypass those standards? Answer: no-one.

You have raised a strawman.

Edward Spalton said...

Like any state the EU has the right to impose administrative, health or technical standards on products entering its territory. WTO rules require that such rules are administered in an impartial way. Traders may do the trade but government, decides the rules. Goods produced in EU countries circulate freely because the authorities in each member state enforce EU standards and are themselves supervised by the EU or EFTA to maintain standards The compliance of goods from non EU states has to be established at the border before the goods can be released for free circulation within the market. This is why the Dutch are already establishing facilities and laboratories for UK goods.
Having had the experience of being a director of an animal feed mill when the EEC standards were introduced here,
I can assure you that the system is not a straw man! We had over a year’s detailed advice from government as to how to comply.
If you want to know what it was like Google “ Edward Spalton the miller’s tale episode 3” and read from secttion 2 . For more up to date information Google “ Edward Spalton trade in food with the EU after Brexit” which also has a link to the manual,used by Port Health Officers and Custms - which I can assure you again is very far from being a straw man! Public health depends on its application.

jack ketch said...

which I can assure you again is very far from being a straw man! -Ed

It sounds infact like a Wicker Man upon which notions of 'friction less trade' may go up in flames. A fiery immolation of cake....toasted tea cake perhaps?

Dave_G said...

@ES - still a straw man. 'They' can make as many rules and regulations as they wish. Countries within the EU comply with them and businesses supplying the EU from without ALSO comply with them. Goods made to such standards can 'circulate freely' no matter where they originate.

So, what's the issue?

As for leaving under WTO rules - how come no one, anywhere, can state what's actually 'wrong' or disadvantageous of WTO rules? If every country in the world bar the EU26 works under them, how come they manage to trade ok?

The idea that the UK will fall off a cliff, hit the buffers etc by leaving under WTO rules is ludicrous. All the products we currently manufacture for sale in the EU will still comply - and if they changed the rules for us, they change the rules for everyone - again, no difference.

The ONLY thing that might affect the UK by leaving under WTO rules is that the EU put DELIBERATE obstacles in our path (and I can see them being childishly arrogant and bitter enough to try) but since it is BUSINESS that will be affected and it's BUSINESS that 'owns' the EU I don't think this will happen or happen for long.

Italy, and now France, are showing the world that the EU is NOT destined to continue on the path it is currently set. The EU are arrogant enough to try to maintain their course but in the face of this kind of opposition?

Edward Spalton said...

The fact that a country may CLAIM that its goods are made to a common standard is irrelevant ( even if they are ) . if goods come from outside the EU,
PROOF is required at the border before they are admitted. This is a combination of documentation ( which may be electronic in advance) and inspections based on risk assessment. The EU made this clear immediately after Mrs May’s unfortunate Lancaster House speech. It takes time and with 12,000 driver-accompanied containers a day going through the Calais/Dover route, this is bound to slow things down . Also the EU would probably require different classes of goods to go to different BIPs ( Border Inspection Posts) when they get round to building them, where staff with specialist qualifications will be available. As EEA/EU goods our stuff presently goes through on the nod unless the authorities have intelligence of suspicious consignments. That stops on Brexit.

Also, the EU requires In most cases of significant value that the FIRST IMPORTER on the EU side takes total responsibility to the authorities for product compliance, payment of duty, inspection fees, demurrage etc. People with the necessary qualifications and
Financial solidity are thin on the ground. The complexity of admitting containers with multiple consignments from various suppliers can be imagined. I am afraid you have been listening to some rather wishful thinking which is at variance with the facts.

Budgie said...

Edward Spalton, What you say about the necessity of compliance to EU standards when exporting to the EU is true. But we must comply with those standards now whilst we're in the EU. Like I said, who claimed we could bypass those standards? - any more than we can bypass USA standards when we export to the USA.

And no nation would "claim that its goods are made to a common standard". It would be nonsensical to try. I doubt even the USSR could achieve that degree of centralisation. Another strawman? As a "third country" we would expect our exports to the EU be treated in the same way as the EU treats the exports of the USA. That's all.

Edward Spalton said...

I recommend that you Google “ Brexit Monographs”, read some of the government’s technical notices and the equivalent EU Notices to Stakeholders and look at.what the Road Haulage Association has to say on the matter.

Budgie said...

Edward Spalton, And I recommend that you take a step back, raise your eyes from the minutiae of EU rules, and consider that the vast majority of the rest of the world (165 nations) trades successfully with the EU without being in the EU or in the EEA. If they can do it, so can we.

I am not going to sell out my country for the Remains "promise" of trade with the EU. Nor for their threat that such trade will cease because we are (meant to be!) leaving their EU empire. As for our exports - we have to comply with each country's (and each customer's) standards already.

Edward Spalton said...

Having been opposed to our EEC/EU membership since 1972, I am certainly not selling out in facing up to the realities.
No country, as far as I know, trades with the EU on WTO rules alone Even tiny Andorra has some 20 treaties on the EU database which an informed commentator will have scrutinised in some detail. From memory the USA has 147 .

To take one example which I have not looked at recently. A British dairy firm makes an organic cheese with a long maturation period which it sells to the USA under arrangements made through the EU. Because those will cease by April next year and there is no assured replacement agreement in place, it had to stop production and buying milk for cheese making. The USA may well agree to “roll over” the existing terms eventually but it is not guaranteed and, of course, they will demand a quid pro quo for doing it. There will be hundreds of similar situations.

When Mrs May said that “no deal,is better than a bad deal” it was rubbish. But now she has come out with a deal so bad that we may
have to face up to the complexities of being a distinctly odd man out in the world trading system with resulting effects on domestic employment. Probably we will end up with a muddled “mitigated” no deal. I understand that there are some 200 items ( such as validity of driving licences) which are potentially capable of being settled - but if they are not cleared up beforehand insurance policies will cease to be valid etc. Given this government’s record, I have little confidence in anything being straightforward.

Our friends in Fishing for Leave point out that the “ vassal state” Implementation period could well finish off what is left of our fishing fleet. See their website.

When Mrs May gave her Lancaster House speech in January 2017, I knew it had been drafted by people unfamiliar with the way the EU worked and the objectives were unobtainable. Sir Ivan Rogers, the UK ambassador in Brussels resigned and Mrs May’s ministers were chortling like adolescents that we could “ have our cake and eat it” . The last two years have proved that the “ cake” was never on offer.

Budgie said...

Edward Spalton said: "... No country, as far as I know, trades with the EU on WTO rules alone ...". You have said that before many times. Remains say that too. It was misleading the first time, and it's still misleading now. The WTO worldwide treaty foundation - GATT and GATS - provides the entire framework necessary for international trade.

Various RTAs and MRAs, in a very limited way, make trade somewhat simpler between the signatories, but take place within the WTO framework, and are totally dependent on the WTO rules and are registered with the WTO. The RTAs and MRAs are desirable but only marginally so, and certainly not worth giving up our independence for. We could trade without them perfectly adequately, even if none are rolled over or novated. So for trade the WTO framework is best.

It makes sense to have a few technical deals with the EU just as we already have with other countries. Examples include the mutual recognition of professional standards (in the DWA), and procedures to deal with double taxation. But if we are not prepared to give the same deal to other countries we should not - we must not - offer it to the EU.

If it isn't independence, it isn't Leave. It's that simple.

Roger Stone said...

Opening of the Brexit debate. Christmas has come early. No need for expensive panto tickets. Where's the popcorn?