Train wrecks are accidents m8
The pressure mounts:
"Draft conclusions from the EU summit have begun to emerge.
The document, which needs to be given the final sign-off by EU leaders, says the bloc can agree a Brexit extension until 22 May and this is conditional on Theresa May getting her deal approved by MPs next week.
It adds that an extension beyond the European Parliament elections is not possible and that the deal it has agreed with the prime minister is not up for renegotiation."
Looks like there’ll be an extension to 22 May conditional on a yes vote next week. Tusk & Juncker’s political assurances also to be adopted by the Council.
So what does more time give the UK? Just more time to whip votes?
More time to actually implement the withdrawal, because our stupid government stupidly triggered article 50 before it was ready.
Wait, what does that Tweet mean, exactly? That rich people won’t get taxed if there’s no deal, but will get taxed if there’s some deal, which is why they are keen on a no deal brexit?
Probably not clear, but that’s what I meant. Any chance of this being not-stupid hinges on her pulling off a yes-vote for her current deal. And the chances of that are not looking good.
And no matter what happens, the political capital she is expending is never coming back. Though maybe she doesn’t care - the knives are going to come out post-Brexit, no matter what happens, and it’s hard to see how she survives that.
Well, yes, as I’ve said before on this thread, she’s not staying as PM for very long whatever happens. But this approach does maximise the (still slim) chances of her deal getting passed, which is about as close to a success as she seems capable of imagining.
Meanwhile in least surprising EU27 news ever, Vestager is officially running for EC president.
I expect right from the beginning she knew when accepting the job that she would be the Brexit scapegoat/lightning rod Prime Minister.
My current prediction:
Her “meaningful vote (ugh) 3” will now undoubtedly fail and it will be interesting to see what happens after that. Surely another VONC which she could fail and then a general election and a long Brexit delay (if agreed by EU). If she wins the VONC then no deal Brexit.
EDIT: I’ve just realized - a VONC cannot stop no deal Brexit because Parliament doesn’t have time to change the Brexit date law.
That’s how I read it.
To be fair, if you put another train on the same tracks and never change the rails you’re on and just keep heading towards it, it would be called a “train wreck” when the impact happens. Which is more or less what’s happening.
The selfish rich screw over everyone else. What a surprise. It was never about sovereignty to these people. It was always about greed, selfishness, racism, power, and xenophobia.
I suppose she could still get her deal passed. She also needs the Speaker to let it get voted on again.
Slim odds, but nothing makes sense anymore, so whatever.
Interesting, I’d not heard of that particular facet of this horror show. Apparently, the EU enacted a directive just earlier this year aimed at preventing some common tax avoidance schemes.
https://www.bna.com/eu-antitax-avoidance-b57982095621/
I don’t pretend to understand all of that, but it seems to boil down to “stop using loopholes and shady practices to get out of paying taxes.” The tweet above indicates that any deal would mean Britain is still subject to the directive. I don’t know if that’s true, and even if it is, not every EU member state has to implement all parts of the directive. But at the very least, it’s a possible reason why some wealthy business owners would be interested in avoiding EU regulation.
To be fair, the UK has already implemented most of that (certainly BEPS 4 and 2 and a general anti-abuse rule, haven’t followed the others as closely), but it’s much easier to walk that back outside the EU in our glorious Singaporean future.
Knowing Singapore as i do, the thought of the idiocracy and legions of chavs with Singaporean work and education ethics is just hilarious.
They could approve a new government, pass the SI to change the date, then vote for a GE.
(NOTE: This is “could” in the hypothetical sense. Since it would require parliament to take decisive and organised action, I don’t see it happening.)