Brexit discussion thread IV

McGiver

Rjd2 wrote: »

An Ciarraioch wrote: »

https://twitter.com/JGForsyth/status/1016417713852436480

May is playing hard ball here with the promotion of Hancock and Hunt who are remainers. She is giving the leavers nothing.

Also

for those who don't like clicking, Mogg doesn't feel they have the numbers to get rid of May so focus will switch to the white paper.

https://twitter.com/DPJHodges/status/1016414362213351424

Bizarre. Amend the white paper? So basically make it even more cakeist than it is? The white paper in current state is unworkable, so they want to make it even more unworkable? Are they so ignorant of the EU red lines and rules or is this some kind of a tactic?

El Weirdo

McGiver wrote: »

Bizarre. Amend the white paper? So basically make it even more cakeist than it is? The white paper in current state is unworkable, so they want to make it even more unworkable? Are they so ignorant of the EU red lines and rules or is this some kind of a tactic?

I just heard a Tory MP on BBC R4 (didn't catch his name), saying that the EU should be snatching their arm off when they offer them the Chequers deal.

Dillusional.

TomOnBoard

JRM and his crowd of headtheballs are so much in denial they need to move to Egypt!!

Hurrache

Hurrache wrote: »

I'm liking the EU's response on all this, to paraphrase, the resignations are not a problem for us, we're here to work.

Tony Connelly appeared quite pessimistic earlier on RTE as to the fate of TM’s most recent proposals. He thinks the UK will have to offer more concessions for a deal to be done. Won’t go down well with Boris Johnson and his ‘Brexit dream’.

Imreoir2

McGiver wrote: »

Bizarre. Amend the white paper? So basically make it even more cakeist than it is? The white paper in current state is unworkable, so they want to make it even more unworkable? Are they so ignorant of the EU red lines and rules or is this some kind of a tactic?

This is Judaen Peoples Front level stuff, your fantisy plan does not stick closely enough to our nonsense.

eire4

Deleted User wrote: »

Tony Connelly appeared quite pessimistic earlier on RTE as to the fate of TM’s most recent proposals. He thinks the UK will have to offer more concessions for a deal to be done. Won’t go down well with Boris Johnson and his ‘Brexit dream’.

No it would not at all. Would not be shocked if somewhere along the line here this triggers a no confidence vote which they could easily lose and force a new election.

Itssoeasy

El Weirdo wrote: »

I just heard a Tory MP on BBC R4 (didn't catch his name), saying that the EU should be snatching their arm off when they offer them the Chequers deal.

Dillusional.

I'm was listening to five live and some Tory MP was painting a beautiful picture of how the U.K. will reclaim all this control over things that maybe I'm wrong but they never really lost.

Sheeps

eire4 wrote: »

No it would not at all. Would not be shocked if somewhere along the line here this triggers a no confidence vote which they could easily lose and force a new election.

Although Corbyns words today were definitely hinted towards that kind of a move, I think they all acknowledge now that a general election this late in the game would be a complete disaster for absolutely everyone.

Itssoeasy

El Weirdo wrote: »

I just heard a Tory MP on BBC R4 (didn't catch his name), saying that the EU should be snatching their arm off when they offer them the Chequers deal.

Dillusional.

Well does the chequers deal fulfill the EUs mantra of "workable and practible" on the proposals from the UK government ? I would say no.

Water John

Real Brexiteers of all hues always amounted to about 80 MPs. That number has no hope of unseating the PM.
She has to face them down and then negotiate with the EU. Then bring that back to Parliament. MPs can then either support that or vote it down.

trellheim

The white paper has yet to be published , so the EU has nothing to respond to.

Capt'n Midnight

captainspeed wrote: »

Well, the Labour party wants *a* customs union with the EU, so that is a big start. I know they do believe in magical thinking, but nowhere near as much as the Conservatives do.

Corby has red lines over the single market which rules out lots of stuff too.

Meanwhile the Blue Passports will be made by a Fench company which has de-facto monopoly on Fench passports.

It's devil and deep blue sea. Both Labour and Conservative want Brexit. And without EU rules acting as a backstop lots of stuff will flip-flop at each election.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/jul/06/michel-barnier-eu-willing-to-compromise-if-uk-softens-brexit-red-lines

... the EU would not shift its own red line on the single market, which he said was “not and never should be seen as a big supermarket; it is economic, cultural and social life, it should be developed in all its dimensions”.

He added: “The single market is our main economic public good. We will not damage it. We will not unravel what we achieved with the UK. We must find solutions that respect the integrity of the single market.”

badtoro

When all is said and done I just can't see past a hard no deal brexit. This is what we should be preparing for. Frequenting UK fora they're just so off the wall and far apart from anything EU related I can't see anything else. An extreme case of navel gazing while Rome is burning,

Imreoir2

The line that the Chequers agreement would be a good deal for Ireland was being pushed on TV3 tonight. It absoutly would not. While it contains a commitment to no hard border, it once again fails to propose realistic conditions to deliver no hard border. If accepted it would undermine the EU hugely. If the EU were to fall apart because of the deal, its loss would be a disaster for Ireland.

trellheim

The line that the Chequers agreement would be a good deal for Ireland was being pushed on TV3 tonight. It absoutly would not. While it contains a commitment to no hard border, it once again fails to propose realistic conditions to deliver no hard border. If accepted it would undermine the EU hugely. If the EU were to fall apart because of the deal, its loss would be a disaster for Ireland.

You have to give the process a little time here. Let the paper get published and lets have the reaction. In all plain honesty given the events of the last 24 it is worth slowing things to a calmer pace.

briany

Water John wrote: »

Real Brexiteers of all hues always amounted to about 80 MPs. That number has no hope of unseating the PM.
She has to face them down and then negotiate with the EU. Then bring that back to Parliament. MPs can then either support that or vote it down.

If 80 is the number then I have to ask why May has waited until 3 months before the official deadline to tell them where to go.

Zubeneschamali

Deleted User wrote: »

Tony Connelly appeared quite pessimistic earlier on RTE as to the fate of TM’s most recent proposals. He thinks the UK will have to offer more concessions for a deal to be done.

It is sometimes hard to keep in mind that 2 years in, this is only the British Governments opening position in negotiations. This is what they are asking for going in to the first day of Phase 2 talks. Up to now they have been fighting with each other and have put nothing on the table at the talks at all.


So of course they are going to have to move from this position during negotiations.

What happened to Peregrinus? He used to post here all the time and had a lot of good insights.

devnull

briany wrote: »

If 80 is the number then I have to ask why May has waited until 3 months before the official deadline to tell them where to go.

From what I heard yesterday, maybe it's wrong, if they do a leadership challenge and it fails they cannot do another one for a year.

Trasna1

trellheim wrote: »

The white paper has yet to be published , so the EU has nothing to respond to.

The publishing of which had been delayed again.

Bigus

Bertie Ahern and Ivan Yates called it well on Newstalk yesterday even , well worth your time to listen to part 2 of the podcast on newstalk the hard shoulder playback for yesterday evening at about 5.10 pm.

Also Fintan O'Toole free content
https://www.irishtimes.com/opinion/fintan-o-toole-britain-has-gone-to-huge-trouble-to-humiliate-itself-1.3558995

National humiliation
Can there be the slightest doubt that the British would have been up in arms, demanding nothing less than full EU membership? Has any country ever gone into international treaty negotiations hoping to emerge with a status greatly inferior to the one it already enjoys? What do we want? National humiliation. When do we want it? Now.

Leroy42

I thought this summed things up well from the Fintan O'Toole piece
https://www.irishtimes.com/opinion/f...self-1.3558995

This is what all the patriotic bombast has brought Britain to: a humble request that the EU play nice and grant it a subordinate status. Imagine that at some point in the past, the EU had actually offered this to the British. How dare they!

I heard a brief snippet on 5Live this morning where the host was talking to some MEP. She made the mistake of saying the the voters did not understand what they were voting for, of course at which point the host pointed out many texts they had received that morning saying they clearly had. The MEP tried to move on, knowing that even bringing that up is a big no-no, but what really they need to start saying is putting it back to them.

As the BBC politics shows asked yesterday, did the voters really understand it was going to be this difficult? The MEP should have asked did the voters really understand the implications. The UK are looking for the EU to compromise, but the EU have never said that they would, that was never part of the campaign (I mean the EU never said it). So why are people complaining that the EU are not being fair? Isn't this exactly what you voted for?

There seems this parallel universe whereby all the voters knew what they were voting for, but they cannot understand why the EU is not giving them what they want even though the EU have always said they couldn't.

lawred2

Leroy42 wrote: »

I thought this summed things up well from the Fintan O'Toole piece
https://www.irishtimes.com/opinion/f...self-1.3558995



I heared a brief snippet on 5Live this morning where the hst was talking to some EU minister. She made the mistake of saying the the voters did not understand what they were voting for, of course at which point the host pointed out many texts they had received that morning saying they clearly had. The MEP tried to move on, knowing that even bringing that up is a big no-no, but what really they need to start saying is putting it back to them.

As the BBC politics shows asked yesterday, did the voters really understand it was going to be this difficult? The MEP should have asked did the voters really understand the implications. The UK are looking for the EU to compromise, but the EU have never said that they would, that was never part of the campaign (I mean the EU never said it). So why are people complaining that the EU are not being fair? Isn't this exactly what you voted for?

There seems this parallel universe whereby all the voters knew what they were voting for, but they cannot understand why the EU is not giving them what they want even though the EU have always said they couldn't.

Brexit means Brexit init

Itssoeasy

Leroy42 wrote: »

I thought this summed things up well from the Fintan O'Toole piece
https://www.irishtimes.com/opinion/f...self-1.3558995



I heared a brief snippet on 5Live this morning where the hst was talking to some EU minister. She made the mistake of saying the the voters did not understand what they were voting for, of course at which point the host pointed out many texts they had received that morning saying they clearly had. The MEP tried to move on, knowing that even bringing that up is a big no-no, but what really they need to start saying is putting it back to them.

As the BBC politics shows asked yesterday, did the voters really understand it was going to be this difficult? The MEP should have asked did the voters really understand the implications. The UK are looking for the EU to compromise, but the EU have never said that they would, that was never part of the campaign (I mean the EU never said it). So why are people complaining that the EU are not
being fair? Isn't this exactly what you voted for ?

I heard it as well. It was a Dutch MEP who made some very valid points up until she made that comment, but she isn't wrong on that comment either. I know asking people on the street is in no way a scientific but from during the referendum campaign it's clear that some hadn't a breeze what brexit meant going on clips I saw.

The host was Nicky Campbell got thick when she said that. He also said they've solved the Irish border question, which I found baffling. No they haven't unless I've missed something in the news. Until the referendum how many people in the UK(outside of NI) even knew there was such a thing as the Irish border ?

VinLieger

Itssoeasy wrote: »

I heard it as well. It was a Dutch MEP who made some very valid points up until she made that comment, but she isn't wrong on that comment either. I know asking people on the street is in no way a scientific but from during the referendum campaign it's clear that some hadn't a breeze what brexit meant going on clips I saw.

The host was Nicky Campbell got thick when she said that. He also said they've solved the Irish border question, which I found baffling. No they haven't unless I've missed something in the news. Until the referendum how many people in the UK(outside of NI) even knew there was such a thing as the Irish border ?

I think the problem is the voters did know what they were voting for but because the leave campaign was so populist and told people exactly what they wanted to hear if you sat 10 leavers in a room and asked them what they voted for they would all give different and mutually exclusive answers ie. Norweigian model, soft brexit, hard brexit, no border, sea border, etc etc


They know what they think they voted for its just that they were all individually lied to about what they were voting for

Leroy42

Totally agree. I had heard maybe 1 minute before and she was very good, but I cringed when she said that as, though correct, its like a red rag to a bull. I got the impression that she knew it was the wrong thing to say as she moved off it very quickly.

BUt I think she is right. Nothing said during the campaign has turned out as it was claimed (both sides) so how can anyone claim that people knew. Are we really supposed to believe that the voters saw beyond all the campaign promises and did their own research? Because if we follow that logic, then how can anyone claim that the current problems are anything but a natural consequence of that vote.

Other than "they need us..." line, what possible reason did they think the EU would abandon the 4 principles. The irony is, that despite the UK claiming that the EU is a dictator, the UK had plenty of opt-outs. The biggest being the Euro itself.

I have to say, history tells us that it really doesn't matter what the EU does. No matter how many opt-outs, buy-ins etc, they will continually be unhappy. Fundamentally, I think this all comes down to the UK being unable to work in cooperation with other nations, it needs to feel it is in charge. Even the latest Chequers agreement mentions UK parliament having a lock on all future EU regulations in the UK.

So, if I was in the EU, I would be looking at the last 40 years and seeing that despite the opt-outs, the UK had decided to leave. Anything less that a full leave will leave neither side will be happy.

The EU will have simply created a huge amount of future problems with both members and third party countries looking for their own opt-outs, and the UK will feel like they were cheated on Brexit and the likes of Boris, JRM and Farage will set to work on slowly ripped them further away, piece by piece, regulation by regulation until at some point the EU is forced to make a decision.

fash

Leroy42 wrote: »

The EU will have simply created a huge amount of future problems with both members and third party countries looking for their own opt-outs, and the UK will feel like they were cheated on Brexit and the likes of Boris, JRM and Farage will set to work on slowly ripped them further away, piece by piece, regulation by regulation until at some point the EU is forced to make a decision.

Yes- EU should give them an FTA only, then sell that to the UK public with "this way you are free to make deals, taken back control, no FoM, no ECJ- it's going to be amazing".

Anything else and they'll feel cheated and blame the EU. It would be hard for them to complain about lack of access- instead their complaints will be focused on their obligations.

lawred2

VinLieger wrote: »

I think the problem is the voters did know what they were voting for but because the leave campaign was so populist and told people exactly what they wanted to hear if you sat 10 leavers in a room and asked them what they voted for they would all give different and mutually exclusive answers ie. Norweigian model, soft brexit, hard brexit, no border, sea border, etc etc


They know what they think they voted for its just that they were all individually lied to about what they were voting for

I think they voted to 'leave the EU' alright - but what the EU is and what role(s) the EU plays in British life - they had literally no clue about.

They have been fed a narrative for many many years that depicted the EU as some pantomime villain - and it sunk in. The converse is at play here - the EU is generally seen as a force for good. Even considering for austerity programmes. And the general establishment message is rarely negative.

Maybe it's a consequence of what Ireland and Britain were prior to joining the EC in 1973 - Britain still held itself as a world power - whether that was validly held is a different debate.. Any regional dis-improvements since then will rightly or wrongly be associated with membership of the EU.

Ireland on the other hand was relatively a backwards kip in 1973 - socially and economically. Our development since then will always be emotionally associated with membership of the EU - whether it would have happened anyway or not is I suppose a moot point.

breatheme

fash wrote: »

Leroy42 wrote: »

The EU will have simply created a huge amount of future problems with both members and third party countries looking for their own opt-outs, and the UK will feel like they were cheated on Brexit and the likes of Boris, JRM and Farage will set to work on slowly ripped them further away, piece by piece, regulation by regulation until at some point the EU is forced to make a decision.

Yes- EU should give them an FTA only, then sell that to the UK public with "this way you are free to make deals, taken back control, no FoM, no ECJ- it's going to be amazing".

Anything else and they'll feel cheated and blame the EU. It would be hard for them to complain about lack of access- instead their complaints will be focused on their obligations.

But Northern Ireland...

lawred2

breatheme wrote: »

But Northern Ireland...

was going to say that