tl;dr

The last word.

apathy kills

apathy kills — Evil

It's not really apathy, except apathy at an endless argument conducted by ignoramuses and special interests with no concern for society as a whole.

International trade relations are important to everyone - rather like the gas central heating installation regulations are important to everyone. But I don't want either of them decided by what Boris can persuade Mrs Thing down the road is a good idea, and I don't want to decide them myself. I want clever experts with lots of time to work out what works best and everyone else to just shut up unless they know something about it.

Fair enough, I suppose it's better than pretending to care.

I want clever experts with lots of time to work out what works best and everyone else to just shut up unless they know something about it. — unenlightened

There's not enough time these days

it's better than pretending to care. — Evil

No it is caring. I care too much about the gas central heating installation regulations to want them decided by a referendum of the ignorant, and the same goes for brexit. And the experts overwhelmingly agree that remain is the best course, both economically and politically, and no more time is required for that.

So this is dragged to October.

So then (or later) a later date is given when Brexit actually happens, I think.

Again EU is showing it's inability to do anything.

The EU benefits if there is some agreement on trade between the UK and its constituents. Instead of disrupting trade unnecessarily due to a hard Brexit, they've opted for a delay. That is still making a choice.

Again EU is showing it's inability to do anything. — ssu

What else are the EU supposed to do? Deny the request and have us leave without a deal? They don't want that.

The problem is entirely with Parliament being unable to agree on what to do.

what a shame this brexit.

Let's have another vote on the deal. That's what I say. Fifth time's the charm?

The EU benefits if there is some agreement on trade between the UK and its constituents. Instead of disrupting trade unnecessarily due to a hard Brexit, they've opted for a delay. That is still making a choice. — Benkei

The EU benefits with the UK being in the EU. So we will continue to October... to only then perhaps start the final (?) transfer time for Brexit.

So, I guess I should be asking how many British here will be eagerly voting on the EU elections in May? Will Nigel Farage, one of your present EU Parliament members be running for re-election?

I wonder how many years will the UK be leaving the EU.

It seems the Brits have gone completely nuts. I'm sure glad that could never happen in America.

What else are the EU supposed to do? Deny the request and have us leave without a deal? They don't want that. — Michael

Of course, IF the EU would be a genuine federation which would behave as real sovereign state, it would have the option to basically shove the Brexit up the UK's ass sideways as a warning to any other state considering leaving the Union. It would then try, first and foremost, to take away the position of the City of London enjoys in the financial markets. The evil money laundering London banks would be a nice populist discourse. And have that no-deal Brexit if the UK doesn't submit. It could possibly lure Scotland to remain in the EU by promising that if Scotland would want independence it would be immediately recognized by the EU and the new country would automatically inherit the position of the UK. Imagine the talk then of the Anglo-Scottish border from over 300 years ago being erected again.

Of course the above is totally ludicrous and crazy. The EU would not and could not act like that. And this just shows that the EU isn't at all one coherent entity or actor like the United States of America. And hence the above shows how the discourse of "Brussels" taking power away from it's members is nonsense: the EU simply doesn't have the ability to truly control it's member states. The idea of a tight federation is not only wrong, it is detrimental. The European Union cannot be anything else than a confederation of independent states.

It would then try, first and foremost, to take away the position of the City of London enjoys in the financial markets. — ssu

That is financially not feasible without seriously undermining the banking book of every EU bank in the process. They'd pay through the nose to move their cleared swaps from LCH to EUREX, ICE and EuroCCP. If you want to move it, it will have to be done gradually by grandfathering existing portfolios and requiring new euro-denominated swaps to be cleared with a CCP established in the EU27. To have the bulk move would then take about 10 years and for all the historic portfolios to close about 30 years. But LCH offers more than just clearing of euro-denominated swaps and would probably be recognised as a third country equivalent CCP any way, which you'd want if you want your EU banks to operate meaningfully internationally.

We had a little break, and now we've had some local council elections.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/may/03/tories-lose-over-1200-seats-in-local-elections-as-major-parties-suffer

So following an election in which both major parties lost, and parties representing remain made large gains, the two major parties are showing us how democracy works by trying to stitch up a brexit deal in order to avoid the humiliation of EU elections.

I don't think I'll be the only one to see that as a betrayal of all principle except self-serving fear of the electorate. Anything at all to avoid an election you will lose, even a compromise you have refused for 3 years.

How it's supposed to work, this democracy thing, is that people stand for ideas and policies they believe in, and try and convince the electorate to agree with them. But what has been happening is that people have been finding out what the electorate want to hear and telling them they stand for that.

And of course what the electorate want is an impossible magic world where everything is free and somebody else does all the work.

What implications do the EU elections have on Brexit?

Surprisingly little. Because the Uk government still has to make a decision, unless the EU finally runs out of patience. Somehow I don't see a few Brexit MEPs swinging the EU to a vote to expel the UK.

Goodbye May, hello BoJo, Britain is screwed. Welcome to the EU, Wales and Scotland?

Welcome to the EU, Wales and Scotland? — Benkei

Scotland and NI, maybe. Wales ain't breaking away.

Looks like Brexit is about to become Broxit: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-48624579

My only hope is that this accelerates the arrival of a Labour government. — S

Apparently Corbyn in literally^† the worst thing in the world:



^† But probably not literally literally

That's sort of the scenario in the US, but it goes both ways. That is, I think most conservatives in the US would have rather seen almost anything than Hillary being elected. The same holds true for liberals. I think they'd have agreed to scrap almost any liberal policy than to have Trump as president.

https://yougov.co.uk/topics/politics/articles-reports/2019/06/18/most-conservative-members-would-see-party-destroye

So dedicated to accomplishing Brexit are Tory members that a majority (54%) would be willing to countenance the destruction of their own party if necessary. Only a third (36%) put the party’s preservation above steering Britain out of the EU.

Party members are also willing to sacrifice another fundamental tenant of Conservative belief in order to bring about Brexit: unionism.* Asked whether they would rather avert Brexit if it would lead to Scotland or Northern Ireland breaking away from the UK, respectively 63% and 59% of party members would be willing to pay for Brexit with the breakup of the United Kingdom.

It really is rather difficult for me at least, to understand what is happening. It is as if we are fighting on the beaches, and on the landing grounds, and in the fields... At any cost, it seems. What has the EU done to warrant preferring the breakup of the country and your own political party?

Your insightful explanations are solicited.

Your insightful explanations are solicited. — unenlightened

Brexit means Brexit.

It is probably the weird assumption that the democratic voice of the people has spoken in the referendum, which was so narrowly in favour of Brexit that the only statistically relevant conclusion that could be made is that the people were hopelessly divided on the issue.

In a sense it's a righteously principled stance, the consequences be damned, because the principles of democracy trump everything else.

I originally thought it was about controlling immigration but it seems it's now about ensuring the right to make worse trade deals with other countries than they already have with the EU. Stumped.

English Nationalism?

I originally thought it was about controlling immigration — Baden

a righteously principled stance, the consequences be damned, because the principles of democracy trump everything else. — Benkei

I reject both of these as being far too pragmatic, too realistic, too thoughtful.

English Nationalism? — frank

That has the ring of true fakery to it. Like the terrible plight of the white race, the poor English are under siege from all quarters, but this hard done by, once proud region that includes the capital of the Union the way the Conservative party is actually called 'The Conservative and Unionist Party', resents those other regions with their separate identities, and has to invent its own identity in the Sainted Nigel, slaying the EU dragon, and King Boris and his knights of the round table returned in Albion's hour of need.

I think it has to be down to an awakened archetype of war and destruction, of sacrifice to the vengeful gods in atonement for the sin of giving up the Empire without a fight.

Did you see any of Game of Thrones?

That's sort of the scenario in the US, but it goes both ways. That is, I think most conservatives in the US would have rather seen almost anything than Hillary being elected. The same holds true for liberals. I think they'd have agreed to scrap almost any liberal policy than to have Trump as president. — Hanover

I didn't think it was like that here. Prime Ministers aren't like Presidents.

Though the biggest takeaway is really that Conservatives are willing to break apart the UK, damage the economy, and destroy their party just to secure Brexit.