Currently I'm moving towards thinking it will be either Crash Brexit (formerly known as no deal Brexit) by incompetence (formerly known as accident) or no Brexit at all. I'd be very happy with the latter, but I fear the former is the more likely. Here's my reasoning:
As we know Theresa May's "deal" (it's not the deal anyway, just the withdrawal agreement) was just voted down again. Resoundingly. Tomorrow will see a vote about no deal. I think parliament will probably vote against no deal. So what happens then? In another vote parliament might then vote for an extension of article 50, but only just. But there's a catch: The UK can't unilaterally extend article 50, it can only ask the EU for an extension. To which the EU needs to agree unanimously. And the EU has already clarified that they will only consider an extension if the UK can present a clear reason and most importantly a clear plan how to resolve the issue. Which the UK can't. Because nobody has a f***ing clue how to fix this mess. Well, or at least not in a way they can agree on.
So the clock ticks down to the 29th of March when the UK will drop out of the EU by automatic operation of the law. Simple as that. Something the ERG nutcases will be very pleased with, and they will do their everything to achieve exactly that.
If no extension is granted because there is no agreeable proposal how and by when to resolve the issue but parliament still wants to avoid Crash Brexit, then it needs to get its act together and push through a revocation of article 50. Which the UK can do unilaterally. But at this point nobody is really talking about and at least at this point I don't see any real appetite for it either.
And all the while life is on hold, business is spending millions (or more likely billions) in trying to prepare, more and more international businesses are abandoning the UK, jobs are lost or not created and the economy suffers.
I just don't get what those who vote down the proposals want, or what a proposal should contain in order for them to accept it. I really don't get it. What a mess. But, to be honest, I hope they don't extend article 50 because I am really tired about articles about Brexit everywhere all the time.
@email@example.com to a large extent those voting against a deal simply want a Crash Brexit (formerly known as no deal Brexit). They actually want to crash out of the EU, mostly for ideological reasons (or because their dark money backers tell them to want it): - On the right the ERG nutcases want to create some kind of ultra-liberal deregulated turbo capitalism. A place where they and their dark money sponsors can make a lot of money (at the cost of everyone else, but that's the least of their worries) - On the left Corbyn and his crew seem to believe only a complete crash can bring the population to accept that only some kind of socialist utopia will be the salvation.
@Armin Grewe Corbyn hates the EU because it stops him renationalizing stuff including stuff like railways that ought be renationalized. Of course he'd have to get elected first which might be a bit tricky 8)
I still think one big reason to vote to remain in a future referendum if we get it would be to screw all the rich scumbags who've engineered much of this and stand to make vast amounts of money on market moves.
I think May's gamble/blackmail of "my deal or no deal" will backfire, as you said people are getting tired of it. I think everyone wants a deal, though, and if it's a good deal (e.g. the Labour proposal) the EU will not want to seem like the bad guys and reject it, instead of saving the day at the last minute. Let's see what happens today, first. If MPs vote against a no-deal Brexit, then Labour have a chance to put their proposal on the table.
But for the love of God, don;t start panic buying, because it becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy! Everyone starts mass buying toilet rolls, we run out of toilet rolls, people say "See? We were right to panic buy everything!" Besides, the Sun and the Daily Mail make good enough alternatives.
I sympathize a lot with the British people, I have British friends who oscillate between resignation, panic and ostrich-tactic.
Yet I think any extension will send the wrong signal, not only to the British politicians, but also to other countries within the EU who ponder their own *xit. It was not the EU who wanted Britain to leave. It was Britain who wanted to leave, however rigged the referendum has been. It was the task of British politicians to deliver, to plan and to prepare, not the task of the EU.
What should an extension achieve? Will the magic unicorn, that failed to show up so far, suddenly appear and make everything right? Will the positions suddenly shift? Will Rees-Mogg at al suddenly see the light?
Nobody forced them to trigger article 50 that early. Nobody forced them to waste two years. As with impertinent children, I think only a painful lesson will be a lesson learned. I am very sad that the genera populace will bear the majority of the suffering, but I also think it's the only way to resolve the situation, unless one of the politicans decides to grow up and call the whole thing off.
The EU parliament alone decided today, to make some things easier in case of crash bexit: For example let Erasmus students end their study in a regular way (and some other decisions). So the " brexit explosion radius" wont be sooooo big at once.
Tje brexiteers simply waited for the EU to budge in the last moment, but i hope, it wont.
I think we may finally be getting somewhere. The PM got a very clear message that no deal is not an answer, and an extremely clear answer that the current deal is just as unacceptable. I expect she also got told by a lot of her ministers that she really ought to retire, and she's already lost another one this evening.
So they now have to either a) come up with a workable deal with the EU (unlikely because I don't think either side can manufacture one even if they wanted to right now) b) revoke the article 50 notification because of meaningful change. Which I think would mean either a general election or a second referendum. c) Crash out and look like morons
Of the three a) is basically impossible. Even if the EU and UK could agree a deal fix there are enough pro-EU and enough 'live free or die' people on each side to probably sink any deal. It's also probably not possible to bring the same deal back for another vote under parliamentary conventions. b) an election would be very messy because parties are split internally and also lots of MPs would lose their seats, and they don't like that. A referendum would however avoid them losing their seats c) will mean massive seat losses for both the major parties and Scotland leaving the union asap
So given MP's first loyalty is to their wallet and cushy job I'm thinking a referendum is now getting a hell of a lot more likely. Minus any stupidity (like the EU passing their idiot copyright law and pissing off the young) that ought to be a clear win for the pro EU side on current polling.
From a politicians point of view there are really only two acceptable paths. A referendum,thereby making it "not their fault", or figuring out how to agree to a deal that seems reaonable and the EU rejects - thereby making it the EU's fault. Spain unfortunately seems to be trying very hard to assist in that.
Maybe a wrong phrasing then: What if a new referendum results in a very thin margin again. I doubt it will get something like 65:35, more like 51:49. If Remain would achieve 51, would that really make things better? Would the Leavers accept that or cry foul? And if Leave would achieve 51%, it would be "ner ner told you so" but the 49% would be even more bitter and the split would go deeper.
And even if article 50 gets revoked, would the rest of Europe return to normal? Or would there be the constant suspicion that any time now, they'd trigger it again.
The damage has been done. There is a deep split in the population that will take a generation to heal. Britain has lost an immense amount of credibility and goodwill and status that will probably never heal.
@Michael Keukert The leavers would have to accept it. That's really one of the problems now. The politicians cannot by political convention really say 'ok this is a right mess, nobody now wants it' because it was passed by a referendum. Only another one an election can really trump it.
The damage ? Not particularly. The split is old, it's a fight that in various forms goes back to 1800's splits in the parties. The divisions over the EU or common market as it was are also very old. It's actually if anything going away because the anti-eu people are slowly dying off.