Is a peoples vote likely?

[Notch7]

On Tuesday the TM deal will get voted down.

Whats next? She must have something up her sleeve.......

I cant see how a peoples vote is possible, notwithstanding the lack of time left, its the options.

-no deal: has basically been ruled out by parliament

- TM deal: well no point having a question on something already turned down and has no public support

 

[EddieM]

If I was a gambling man, I would guess the most likely scenario is a revocation of A50. There's not enough time for a 2nd (3rd) ref.

 

[JohnD]

"no deal" is the default that will occur unless parliament can agree on something else. Which it shows no sign of.

EU27 is unlikely to give the unanimous consent necessary for an extension to be granted.

EU27 has said that negotiations are over, and improved terms are not going to be offered.

There is no solution to the Irish Border problem if we stick to Theresa's Red Lines or to the Brexer's insistence on preventing Freedom of Movement, and hence the Single Market which depends on it. There never has been a solution and we have known that for more than two years. Because it's impossible. But the Brexers insist that we mustn't have a backstop. Which is also impossible if we want a deal with EU27. Which we know. So maybe we will cut Northern Ireland adrift and let it join RoI in some way.

Theresa has deliberately spun the process out to use up the available time to prevent any renegotiation or another referendum or election. Once we reach the end of March it is too late to cancel A50 or ask for an extension. It is also too late to arrange another General Election before the end of March.

The smart money is betting on staying in.

Can't see how that will be arranged.

As Eddie has said, whoever is in government in January, or February, or March, would have the power, if Parliament consents, to cancel A50 and announce that we will take our time and try to work out what the country actually wants, and what it can actually have. Which should have been done before the 2016 referendum, but wasn't, and still hasn't been, because we are led by a bunch of sloganeering numbskulls.

Perhaps Parliament will do that.

If they can actually ever agree on anything.

Which they show no sign of.

 

[JohnD]

"However, MPs in the Commons are still limited in what they can do: they can either vote for options the government provides them with or vote the government out. If the vote next week does go against the government, as seems likely, the question then will be whether the anti-deal majority can coalesce around anything other than attempting to stop no-deal. The UK leaves the EU on March 29 by default.

That is written into statute and international law, so no matter how many votes go against the government on no-deal preparation, unless an alternative to Mrs May’s deal is voted for instead, Brexit will still happen."

https://www.ft.com/content/781ba1fa-1421-11e9-a168-d45595ad076d

 

[JohnD]

And here's a representative of "smart money"

This odious character, and associates, shovelled millions into firing up Leave, and profited billions from the ensuing turmoil.

Now he seeks to make more billions by the collapse of Brexit.

"Odey homes in on UK assets ahead of key Brexit vote

Investors say scrapping EU exit would trigger ‘monster’ rally in stocks and sterling"

"A top hedge fund manager says he is losing faith in the chances of the UK leaving the EU, leaving sterling well placed for a rare but rapid rally.

Crispin Odey, founder of Odey Asset Management and a big financial backer of the campaign to leave the union, had been betting against the pound throughout last year, in the expectation that leaving the bloc would hit the UK economy hard. But in the past two weeks he closed those short positions, and is now neutral on the currency, he told the Financial Times.

He has also been buying some UK stocks including Dixons, the high street retailer. “Markets have already decided essentially that Brexit isn’t going to happen,” he said. “The pound should rally; it’s very oversold.”

Investors’ enthusiasm to pounce on news suggesting the exit from the UK may be softened, delayed, or even scrapped, is clear. On Friday the pound jumped as much as 0.6 per cent to a high of $1.2850 on reports the Cabinet was planning to delay Brexit and after foreign secretary Jeremy Hunt said voting down Theresa May’s deal to exit the EU could scupper Brexit altogether.

Next week, the prime minister’s plan for Brexit will be presented to parliament for approval. Mr Odey is among those who believe it will not pass. Given that three-quarters of MPs voted to stay in the EU in the 2016 referendum, “it’s easy to see . . . that you’re going to get a Remain result”, he said. “I haven’t given up the Brexit dream. But I don’t think the pound will crash down to $1.05,” he added. Sterling “has got a positive bias to it”.

After spending most of 2018 heading south against the dollar and the euro, sterling has rebounded against the greenback and is roughly flat against the single currency since mid-December.

Defeats in the House of Commons for the government have revealed what appears to be a majority of MPs against a no-deal Brexit and limited the government’s options. Other market participants agree that any shift to a soft Brexit would kick the pound much higher, particularly given the weight of bets against it that have persisted for the past two years.

It would be a “monster” rally, said Gregory Perdon, co-chief investment officer at private bank Arbuthnot Latham.

Mr Odey, whose Odey European fund gained 53 per cent last year as one of the world’s best-performing hedge funds after losing 21.7 per cent the previous year, said Mrs May’s Brexit proposal was “completely out”.

A so-called Norway Plus option, in which Britain would become part of the European Free Trade Association, is “not bad” but “a long way short” of a full Brexit, he added.

Most hedge funds have been reluctant to place bets one way or another on sterling for some time, believing that the political turmoil was too hard to decipher and that the eventual move in the pound could just as easily be lower or higher. However, in recent months some have started to venture in by buying call options — the right to buy at a set price — which lets them profit from a rebound whilst limiting their losses.

Banks’ analysts are also turning positive on the pound because they believe the prospect of a no-deal is too ugly for lawmakers to stomach. BNP Paribas, for instance, said it was “time to go long”. “We expect the pound to strengthen if a consensus builds for a second EU referendum ‒ as we see as likely to be the case ‒ as markets adjust to an increased probability of no Brexit and a reduced probability of a ‘no deal’,” said Parisha Saimbi at the French bank. Sterling would rise to around $1.36 in that scenario, she predicted — a pick-up of nearly 10 cents. Kit Juckes at Société Générale goes further, suggesting that if it breaks $1.35 it could reach as high as $1.45. Its average between 2010 and 2015 was, after all, $1.58, he said. “Not an easy spot trade” he said, given the problems in picking timing, but potentially one to play through options."

https://www.ft.com/content/cc491f18-15bc-11e9-a581-4ff78404524e


Do you know who the people are that will actually be better off as a result of Brexit? I do. It isn't the common citizens of the country. Not even the richest 10%

 

[noseall]

we are led by a bunch of sloganeering numbskulls

I seem to remember those people. Didn't they say Brexit would be a piece of cake?

 

[ellal]

Didn't they say Brexit would be a piece of cake?

The 'easiest deal in history' apparently...

And they were all eating that cake whilst ordering more on the 'never never'!

 

[ellal]

I cant see how a peoples vote is possible

Why not?

If it turns out that the only two options currently left are not likely to pass through our legislative bodies, then what other option is there than to ask the electorate?

After all, the 'will of the people' was to 'return political power' to our parliament...

And if the will of parliament is to go for another vote, what's wrong with that?

 

[noseall]

Why not

Because it will set a dangerous precedent and upset a lot of people.

 

[JohnD]

If the next referendum can be delayed for a couple of years, demographics will have changed the result.

 

[ban-all-sheds]

Didn't they say Brexit would be a piece of cake?

It will be.

 

[ban-all-sheds]

Because it will set a dangerous precedent

It already has.

and upset a lot of people.

It already has.

 

[ban-all-sheds]

You only have to look at those who are most opposed to another referendum, and the way they misrepresent it, to see

a) Why they are so scared of it happening

and

b) why it's a BGI.

 

[EddieM]

If the next referendum can be delayed for a couple of years, demographics will have changed the result.

That's very debatable, yes I've see the pseudo "science" behind that very tenuous statement. The main reason for no 2nd / 3rd (whatever) referendum is that it takes 22 months to organise, and the EU do not want a potentially leaving member state to vote in the EU elections in May.

 

[Notch7]

Why not?

If it turns out that the only two options currently left are not likely to pass through our legislative bodies, then what other option is there than to ask the electorate?

Youve answered 'why not'? ...........

Its because there arent any options available...