Brexit - the end of the beginning - the negotiations begin

I never thought of Jon Snow as being left wing. I must watch him with more interest from now on.

I couldn't give a flying fig what JS has said - that speech was unbelievable - she knows the deal is going to be a disaster and is getting her excuses in early - God help us all

David Cameron and a vote in the H of C (Labour voted with the government) stated quite clearly that the result of the referendum would be implemented, so how could TM revoke this when she undoubtedly agreed?.

That's what people on here have been trying to tell you for ages.
The man who wrote it didn't expect it to be used.
It also says we can back out of it if we want to, but nobody reads that part of it either.

It's come to something when john snow ( another high priest of the left wing) is defending TMs speech outside No.10

Many on here love to quote Article 50 and how we should stick to the letter of the law herein.
Can I just point out what Mr Verhofstadt ( eu negotiator) thinks of Article 50.
He thinks it's ambiguous. "It's not so precise but the lack of precision gives us an opportunity to apply it in different ways"
So basically it doesn't mean jack shit, we can both take or dismiss parts of it that we like or not.

Something else she didn't have to do was have that meal with Juncker. She set it all up so she could have that confrontation before she made that speech today.

Sneaky and smug today.

WW I definately agree the referendum could have been on clearer terms, and with the minimum age being 16. But May inherited a leaving vote and she is taking massive criticism over how she has dealt with things since becoming PM. I'm can't really see what she could have done to get us in a better position since then, other than just effectively ignore the referendum.
I'm not sure if you are saying she should re-run the vote now? I don't see how that could work. It's a dog's breakfast but the cause was the vote, not really TMs efforts to do as instructed (ok - "advised").

Actually she did not just have to go with an advisory referendum. She had a good idea the outcome of leaving was likely to be disastrous for the UK - just look at the job loses already announced with companies moving abroad. She and her Govt could have looked further into the likely scenarios of Brexit and then have a proper referendum with the necessary turnout and the right sort of division - Farage himself said 4% was nothing like a big enough gap to call it a proper result and if that was the result it would need re running.

She must wait until she can come out of a negotiation waving a little piece of paper Margaret. She will then say she has won what was always going to be agreed.

I've just jeard Juncker on German radio saying he likes
T May. He is surprised that such an intelligent woman takes such a stance. If the EU is coming over a bit strict it is because of the French election and any other state which is playing with the idea of leaving.
Whether she gets voted in as a PM is only important to her.

Germany is not afraid of not selling their cars, driving one is addictive, but they are worried about the thousands of other small industrial firms and want to get things settled.
According to Barnier UK citzens in Germany and the other EU countries, need unemployment benefit, health care and higher education, according to the norm for the normal. citizens, and he wants it all for EU workers in the UK
She has to agree with that. Why doesn't she say so?

GG I can't really see what else TM could have done to make our position much better. Could she have just Ignored the referendum and not served notice at all? Not really an option. Should she just do as the EU say? She could do that, starting with an £85bn payment and no hint of what sort of trade deal, if any, might be offered. I can't see that is any better than the current mess. The EU have us by the throat but she has to make some sort of effort to argue for more balanced negotiations. KS has put forward Labours idea but didn't refer to free movement at all. How can they just ignore such a fundamental point? I just don't see a sensible way forward so long as the EU insist on turning the screw - and I see little prospect of them failing to do so. To be honest, why should they? But to finish where I started I struggle to see what those who criticise TM really expect her to do.

Oh yes - it certainly would.

Would shoddy and shameful count?
After a glass of champagne that she's probably sipping now in anticipation?

I am expecting others to come up with other "S & S" suggestions Jen - just to help us stay sane until the end of all this

Totally agree Tricia. She is basically a high level administrator. I'm afraid that is true of many of the high level so-called politicians because that way they don't upset anyone by talking about real beliefs. The issue, in her case, is that she wasn't all that successful in meeting her administrative targets; just in keeping her head down and staying in the job.

She only said it twice in her doorstep speech, Gracesgran.

GGMk2 wrote
"May reminds me of someone who has asked for a divorce expecting her other half to hand over the house, the money and the children only to be faced with the fact that she has to share and, quite possibly get a deal it is difficult to live on."
Exactly, I know someone else like that.
But what is more disturbing, how can someone as ignorant and naive as that be accepted as a leader of a country?

Dear me, do I hear the sounds of stamping feet from the direction of No 10? T May reminds me of someone who has asked for a divorce expecting her other half to hand over the house, the money and the children only to be faced with the fact that she has to share and, quite possibly get a deal it is difficult to live on.

Meanwhile we still hear nothing about their ideas for the country and more and more S & S (today, I am hearing it as Sadistic and Savage - as the Cons have been to the poor and less able )

It must be obvious now that these these talks aren't going to achieve diddly squat by the end of 2 years.
This was always their intention so that they could go back to the sheep and say: look, this is what happens if you attempt to leave.
I so wish that TM would just walk away, but that's not going to happen, so, bring out the big guns Teresa, be as nasty as you want. They have shown their hand now, its war ( metaphorically speaking) don't want to upset some of you delicate people

Greece was in a very different position than the UK now is. They got themselves into great difficulties mainly financially and had a few bale outs. That is nothing like the position of the U.K. - which could in fact ask to change the position and remain in the EU.
The people dealing in the main with these negotiations sound very reasonable all the time - since the beginning have acknowledged that about half the country does not wish to leave and is trying to accommodate that too. TM and her cohort have never acknowledged those who voted to Remain - totally ignoring them probably in the vain hope they will go away.
There was a clear pathway set out in EU law about what should follow the vote and that is all the EU is doing. It would probably be prudent of people to read what is likely to happen to the population of the U.K once Brexit is accomplished and the Govt are no longer bound by EU laws (most of which were drawn up by the UK which is acknowledged as being good at making laws). Things will be very different for the people who will have nothing like as many rights. There have been a couple of articles about this fact today which I have read.
Fortunately it may work out that the UK will need to keep some laws in place if UK wishes to trade at all with the EU. The advice from the Farmer's Union is to start stockpiling tins of food before we leave as there are likely to be food shortages - they give the reasons why.

Sorry Mazie. Dougan!

Mazie re your question. Your guess was right - I'm not a professor of EU law! However, I'm sure I'm right on this one. The problem they have on sequencing is that while there was absolutely nothing in EU law that stopped them from negotiating items in parallel, there is now because the 27 got together and agreed a negotiating brief for the Commission, who are now stuck with it unless they get all 27 together again to agree a new one! Not an issue of Eu law or constitutional principles. Further, members can change any item of any article if they agree. They have made fundamental changes on numerous occasions. So really, nothing is absolutely sacred. I'm sure Prof. Duggan will confirm if asked!

I think, if you can, it would be handy for interested posters to watch BBC Parliament 'LIVE' on free view 131.

It is discussing the 'Preparation For Brexit'. They are discussing Reciprocal Rights .

Guy Verhofstadt is basically taking questions.