Talk for Article "Understanding Brexit: What is ‘no deal’?"

Talk about this Article

  1. [ This comment is from a user you have muted ] (show)

    Do you favour updates to stories or new stories even if the title is essentially the same ?
    The reason for asking is that I have just watched the Parliament TV recording of the Treasury Select Committe on 25th October. Sir Ivan Rogers (probably the UK civil servant with most EU experience who resigned back in early 2017) gave evidence, along with two law professors, and he gave detailed analysis of what a ‘no deal’ might actually mean. His experience demonstrates that use of terms such as ‘hard’, ‘soft’, ‘no’ can be misleading with proper definition.

  2. [ This comment is from a user you have muted ] (show)

    I’ve sprinkled in some ‘citation needed’ on some factual claims that aren’t cited.

    Also, we currently say “On June 23 2016, 52 percent of the British public voted to exit the European Union in a referendum.” and I don’t think that’s accurate. 52 percent of the people who voted voted to exit, not 52 percent of “the British public” much less 52 percent of the eligible British electorate.

    1. [ This comment is from a user you have muted ] (show)

      Thanks Jimmy, have amended and clarified those.

    2. [ This comment is from a user you have muted ] (show)
      DU
      Deleted User

      This is always a bone of contention with me in the way elections and referenda a reported, the lack of acknowledgement of those who abstained. We are so obsessed with the result, we forget that many people usually feel so disconnected that they can’t be bothered to turn out, or perhaps (and we will never know) actually couldn’t find any name on the ballot that they would trust – or found the choices equally unappealing.

      This represents an opportunity for us to take some high ground.

      1. [ This comment is from a user you have muted ] (show)

        Indeed. It’s important to be precise.

  3. [ This comment is from a user you have muted ] (show)

    >> Prime Minister Theresa May first used the phrase “no deal for Britain is better than a bad deal” in January as she warned EU leaders not to punish Britons for voting to leave the EU.

    >> Exactly what that statement meant, and *whether it implied that May would consider staying in the EU* or completely cutting ties instead of accepting a bad deal, was the focus of the British media and the public for months.”

    As a UK citizen with regular access to the UK media, it’s always been completely clear to me that “no deal” (on Theresa May’s terms) meant *leaving* the EU without a deal, not staying in it, and I don’t remember any disagreement or debate in the UK media over that particular point.

    Three paragraphs down, the article seems to contradict this alleged uncertainty anyway, with this statement:

    >> “No deal” means Britain leaving the EU without a trade agreement by automatic operation of law on March 29 2019.

    1. [ This comment is from a user you have muted ] (show)

      Hi Daniel – going to edit to make that clearer! Thank you.

  4. [ This comment is from a user you have muted ] (show)
    DU
    Deleted User

    In the no-deal case, as well as UK citizens losing rights of residency and free medical care in the EU, the same would be true of EU citizens in the UK. The article doesn’t make this reciprocity clear.

    1. [ This comment is from a user you have muted ] (show)

      Thanks for pointing this out. Will add a line on the same being true of EU citizens in the UK.

  5. [ This comment is from a user you have muted ] (show)

    “after two years of negotiations, at the end of March 2019. With less than a year remaining on the clock, stakes are high”

    This is not clear to me, as they have two years of negotiations with a deadline of March 2019. If that is the case they have more than a year remaining unless there is something else that I am not aware of.

    1. [ This comment is from a user you have muted ] (show)

      Hi Aidan – you’re right it is wrong. It was supposed to say “less than a year and a half” so have changed it to that! Thanks so much for flagging.

Subscribe to our newsletter

Be the first to collaborate on our developing articles

WikiTribune Open menu Close Search Like Back Next Open menu Close menu Play video RSS Feed Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Reddit Follow us on Instagram Follow us on Youtube Connect with us on Linkedin Connect with us on Discord Email us