…the case for a hard Brexit crumbles. Today a member of the cabinet, Amber Rudd, has suggested that a Norway+ solution might be a compromise solution if parliament won’t approve May’s Chequers-based deal. Maybe its an attempt to scare the Brextremists into supporting May’s deal? I am not sure. Rudd is a Remainer. I suspect that she is trying to widen the debate so that a pro-Remain outcome is more likely.

The Norway+ arrangement would mean that we pay for access to the single market and free movement of labour continues. The " + " would be the part that Norway doesn’t enjoy which is membership of the customs union in order to deal with the NI border issue. It would amount to more or less the status quo position but without representation in the EU government structures…so rule taker not rule maker.

I said a long while ago that something like Norway might be a Brexit option that I could support as second best to remaining in the EU as a compromise position. It would be a form of Brexit but would protect the Irish settlement and our key trading relationship with the EU. It would also have the merit of providing certainty…at least until the next referendum which would hopefully not be until a long time hence.

On the contentious issue of freedom of movement, as a country we are a net beneficiary but there is some scope within EU rules to limit access to benefits and services and residency to those who have no means of supporting themselves. This might be enough to satisfy some of those influenced by stories in the Express and the Mail.

In my view there is a chance that Norway+ might be able to gain majority support in parliament and the country.


Frog in a tree


Hi Oily, Norway are saying they don’t want us to upset the EFTA applecart though, and Labour will try to pull the government down if at all possible, that seems to be their only aim, nothing constructive and although every time JC is asked a question he has no answer one way or the other. Things may tilt TM’s way, I wouldn’t be surprised, she’s got the Daily Mail and Disgusted of Tunbridge Wells onside now with the change of editor. Interesting times as you say.


Your guess (with respect) is a good as mine.

I think the same could be said about the Grieve’s Amendment. It’s possible that it might make a difference, but at the same time no differnece at all.

“Probably” we might, but it’s just as likely Parliament will need to act and that could force a leave on WTO rules, as it’s at least action. You could see how that could happen, how they could be under pressure to “do something”.

I still think my position is most likely, it’ll pass on the 2nd MV.

I agree with you about Labour, I’ve said before May might come out of this well, what ever the outcome, it’s likely to be worse for Corbyn’s Labour.


That’s not quite correct. They and the other members would be happy for the UK to join EFTA/EEA… but they aren’t happy about the UK joining on a temporary basis only… as has been touted.

Norway PM Solberg said regarding temporary UK membership last month:
“We would welcome any good cooperation with Britain. But to enter into an organisation which you’re leaving is a little bit difficult for the rest of us”.


But nobody in Parliament wants a ‘No’ deal (WTO deal) so I cannot see Parliament choosing that path unless there is absolutely no other option. Economic suicide is not action…it’s reckless. There is only a few handful of nutter MP’s (the ERG et al) who want a ‘NO’ deal.

If it is a ‘No’ deal and it turns out to be a car crash then any MP who supported it will be severely punished at the ballot box IMO. I expect MP’s will be thinking of that when they vote.


What is it about WHATABOUT that you don’t like?

I Talk abt Leave Donor being investigated for crime by electoral commission
Leave campaign found guilty of cheating and fined.
Leave campaign used Facebook extensively stealing contact data and posting lies.

and all you lot reply with is Whatabout something completely different

Basically you know you’ve been conned and just cant admit it and you dont have any positive arguments for Brexit which is falling apart… …so whatabout or names or "we will be on the street " is all you have.

Imagine Posting to ten of millions of People lies like this just days before the vote. Impossible to know if 1000,s or Millions voted based on this (Only one way to find out) but its a powerful scary message.



“No Deal” is dead.
Just a matter whether some other Deal with EU can get a majority support now… or whether they put it to… #BrexitRef2… in which case Remain will easily win.


That’s another reason why I think the 2nd MV will get passed.


What about it, it’s all in the past…


I think you might be right but it will be just because Brexit MP,s vote for it afraid of losing another referndum eg Saving Face


Yep, don’t disagree with that, but hey, it’s the winning that counts.

Another “what if” I think :wink:

But it will mean no 2nd Referendum.

That might be the best for business, they can get on and deal with the new opportunities in front of them.

You see, lots of remainers are coming around to the May Deal, just the theatre of politics and debate. After that the 2nd MV will pass.


Yes but what will you win ?? This from the LSE
For me the argument FOR brexit in any form is just not there… Brexiters rely on threats and names rather than any kind of positive predictions for the future and will fail…


Pete, I think you see all people who voted for Brexit as one unitary group that voted for the same reason (in the same way). That, with respect, is a rather naive approach to a complex question.

For you there isn’t any argument for Brexit, so trying to convert you would be a complete waste of time. I respect that.

You appear to want a clear cut positive prediction, but let me ask you this question.

If you had a strongly held belief about how society should be organised, lets say in terms of income disparity for argument, but the a consequence might be a reduction in GDP would you vote for it or not?

Is your only concern about the size of the economy?

Let’s pretend you answer is No. You would vote for somehting you strongly believed in.

So why would you expect everyone who voted for Brexit to have a single economic reason for doing so?

So being able to give you a positive economic prediction of the future you crave. Although you’ve already decide it “will fail…”

I have my own reasons for believing this is a good option for the country, that include the economic, the social and ideological.

I hope you get where I’m going with this?

If you do, you will also maybe get why Corbyn is so luke warm in remaining. Let’s face it, he’s been for leaving for decades.

So if you want a purely economic reason, I’d suggest that you are missing a rather large issue: people do vote with their back pocket, but they also vote because they want a particular or different kind of society.

As far a Brexit goes, it crossed the traditional political party boundaries, so suggests a wide range of reasons why people voted Leave. Some economic, some social, some ideological.

What will we win? I’m my case a greater chance of having the society I want, along the economic model I believe in.

Now, I think it’s time you answered a question.

What could you have lost by remaining?

I suspect you’ll say nothing, but then perhaps you don’t share the same vision as Comrade Corbyn or haven’t thought about it yet.

I look forward the your musing on what you might have lost by remaining, I don’t expect you to put an economic cost around that…


“But it will mean no 2nd Referendum.
That might be the best for business, they can get on and deal with the new opportunities in front of them.”

Wise words DP best for business, investors, the economics of the country have been negated by Brexit, the country should move on now rapidly. Any further prevarication is to the nation’s detriment. But try telling that to the politicians.


#BrexitRef2 can be held in Summer next year… after 2 1/2 years of getting almost nowhere… and a future Deal that is entirely wish-washy and subject to years of further negotiation… it isn’t going to hurt to have a vote on the Withdrawal Agreement/Final Deal as it stands… which also will allow a No Deal option… or a Remain.


#BrexitRef2 can be held in Summer next year… after 2 1/2 years of getting almost nowhere… and a future Deal that is entirely wish-washy and subject to years of further negotiation… it isn’t going to hurt to have a vote on the Withdrawal Agreement/Final Deal as it stands… which also will allow a No Deal option… or a Remain.”

You can take your #BrexitRef2 (whatever that means) and ride off into the sunset next summer with it.


And who, Kaka, is going to do the voting? Of course, it appears at the moment that its likely that May’s deal will get voted down next week and, if so, she may decide to take it to a second vote. It seems unlikely that the EU will compromise further so getting approval at a second vote looks fairly unlikely. But, if she fails the second vote, what do you then suggest if parliament votes down a “no deal” exit? That’s the problem you face, and to be fair, its the problem we Remainers face too.

So in those circumstances, what do you suggest?

Frog in a tree


DP, I thought your post to PTN was very thought provoking. So you voted for reasons other than economic! that partly because the economic argument has taken a battering since the vote and appears to be on very shaky ground (predictions like the £350m per week for the NHS were soon shown to be laughable IMO).

I suspect the question Remainers ask themselves is “What will we lose by Leaving?”…quite a lot ‘we’ reckon (as a Leave voter who is now a Remainer I try to see things from both sides…not always easy).

If, a big if, we end up in a Norway type deal (Norway plus?!) then I suspect Leavers & Remainers will be asking themselves…“What’s the point of that?”. It could be that MP’s don’t go for TM’s deal (for various reasons) and would do anything to avoid a ‘No’ deal, leaving something like Norway +. Which is very much like being in the EU but being a rule taker (an associate member of the club)…not something that would sit very well with an idealogical Brexit methinks. But Brexit means Brexit (as has so often been said) and it would in theory mean we were leaving…but what would be the point?


I think I said I voted for a number of reason.

You might consider the economic argument is finished, where’s I think the economic arguments hasnt yet started.

Strange bed fellows this has made of us all.

I find myself on the same side as large numbers of Labour supporters.

Equally, Conservatives that I have little in common with, besides a pro-market stance,

I’m glad you found it thought provoking.

I still think MV2 is the most likely outcome.

Are you banging on about the bus again? I can hardly comment on the campaign.

I take very little interest in Farage or the other one except for the amusement they occasionally provided

I didn’t see much in the campaign that reflected my expectations, the point I was trying to get over to Pete, except for the opportunities that a post-Brexit UK might offer.

I really think you should consider the cost of remaining, for the balance you strive for.

It would be a sensible thing to do, unless you want to fall into the trap of being one of those reactionary small c conserbatives I mentioned the other day.

Now, are you really happy to just to except the status-quo without thinking about what might be?

I hope not, it would make you a particularly bad investor. :roll_eyes:


Nothing could be lost by remaining we would of course stay the same…

The only way that could be a loss is IF there was any chance the country would be more prosperous and happier IF we leave.

However LEAVE has been unable to show we would be anything other than a much poorer divided sad country… all the evidence points that way…