Brexit discussion thread VII (Please read OP before posting)

Schnitzler Hiyori Geta

ToBeFrank123 wrote: »

This is a bit of a cyclical discussion but anyways...

A No Deal crash out is very much a problem for the EU, particularly for Ireland where WTO tariffs will pretty much kill off our beef industry, unless the EU are prepared to stump up something like a billion more in subsidies for Irish beef farmers. There are numerous ways a no deal crash out is bad for the UK and EU. May will want to leave that card on the table for as long as possible. Its one of the few cards she has left to play.

Sources for:

1) Level of beef imports to UK;
2) Where else UK will be able to get beef;
3) How easily a trade deal can be negotiated with country at 2;
4) Alternative buyers of Irish beef.

I lot of unsupported finger in the air stuff in your post tbh. Unless UK can provide all its own beef to replace Irish beef, WTO tariffs are the UK's problem not ours.

youcantakethat

youcantakethat wrote: »

given the waste and inefficiencies in the EU, I would say the UK will do just nicely in a number of years time, and will outlast the EU.

I look forward to the emergence of this nirvana of a stunningly efficient English government in the remnant of the current UK. All those privatised royal residences, the abolition of the elitist and archaic House of Lords and major trimming of the bloated civil and public services. No doubt there will be countless Brexiters still blaming the EU for that waste while the Boris Johnson Tory types profit from the scapegoating.

£120 billion waste in British public sector per annum

youcantakethat wrote: »

Shame about our 200 highly paid Irish language translators, there are more of them than speak Irish here on a daily basis ffs!

How apt that a rant against the EU, political independence of the Irish from Britain, and a rant against the Irish language, intellectual and cultural independence of the Irish from Britain, are going hand in hand here.

prawnsambo

Leroy42 wrote: »

OT, but maybe there is someone on here that would be able to say what sort of things are typically discussed at meetings like the one mentioned above. I assume nothing concrete is discussed, its more a meet and great sort of thing.

Well you'd suppose that talks would include some sort of work to mitigate the effects of brexit for both countries. So apart from import/export substitution, you'd also have discussions on what EU measures you'd be co-operating on and also information/expertise exchange. For example, I understand that there's a fair bit of exchanging of civil servants between ourselves and Estonia. Some for language training purposes and others for expertise.

ToBeFrank123

In any case its irrelevant at this stage what May thinks about taking No deal or not off the table so its just pointless posturing asking her. Its in the hands of parliament if it will be taken off the table or not. She cannot force her opinion through via a vote one way or the other. In fact the more you look at it, the less power May has if she ever had some to do any negotiations.

It would have saved everyone time if a cross party group of MPs had held negotiations with the EU rather than May leading negotiations and going back continually looking for more. That way the MPs could take responsibility and blame on themselves.

Macy0161

10000maniacs wrote: »

I'm not convinced by your argument that the option for a second referendum is not available anymore if there is an extension to Article 50. Can you explain why you think this is so.

Or the revoking of Article 50 being off the table.

Quin_Dub

Leroy42 wrote: »

OT, but maybe there is someone on here that would be able to say what sort of things are typically discussed at meetings like the one mentioned above. I assume nothing concrete is discussed, its more a meet and great sort of thing.

I'd imagine at the ministerial level it would be about alignment more than detail.

"We both agree that we should work together on X" kind of thing.

Then it's getting the permanent secretaries and civil servants stuck into the details...

ToBeFrank123

Schnitzler Hiyori Geta wrote: »

Sources for:

1) Level of beef imports to UK;
2) Where else UK will be able to get beef;
3) How easily a trade deal can be negotiated with country at 2;
4) Alternative buyers of Irish beef.

I lot of unsupported finger in the air stuff in your post tbh. Unless UK can provide all its own beef to replace Irish beef, WTO tariffs are the UK's problem not ours.

Pretty much everything is finger in the air stuff at this stage, unless you know otherwise?
Maybe you should answer your own questions.

Re the first one.
https://www.farmersjournal.ie/irish-beef-exports-in-2016-reached-highest-level-in-over-10-years-262212
No deal, tariffs are added. At best this means customers in the UK not buying beef as much. At worst, cheaper beef from outside the EU will be brought in. We just don't know what will happen. Although you seem to, so I'd be interested in your opinion on what will happen.

reslfj

ToBeFrank123 wrote: »

She cannot verbally take no deal off the table as that is one of her bargaining chips with the EU to possibly get a better deal.

No it really is not a bargaining chip.

The EU27 dislikes an unorderly 'no deal' Brexit. But if the WA is not signed so be it.

The EU27 has given more concessions to Brexit than it should have. Now is enough in Brussels and among the EU27 electorate.

But the EU27 will not suffer much and its Euro 13,000bn economy can easily afford a no deal.
The EU continues to have is brilliant SM and well working FTA and other deals with all economical important countries.

The UK will however be in free fall, and within weeks or a few months lose jobs by the 10,000, see SMEs fail, UK citizens will face all kinds of problems including with food, medicine, ....

Lars

prawnsambo

ToBeFrank123 wrote: »

Pretty much everything is finger in the air stuff at this stage, unless you know otherwise?
Maybe you should answer your own questions.

Re the first one.
https://www.farmersjournal.ie/irish-beef-exports-in-2016-reached-highest-level-in-over-10-years-262212
No deal, tariffs are added. At best this means customers in the UK not buying beef as much. At worst, cheaper beef from outside the EU will be brought in. We just don't know what will happen. Although you seem to, so I'd be interested in your opinion on what will happen.

In terms of beef imported from outside the EU, there will definitely be some of this. However it will be subject to the same tariffs and if the EU/UK tariff schedule split gets through, will also be subject to quotas. I'm not bored enough to look these up, but iirc, it's too small an amount to replace what's imported from here. And there's also the issue of standards, which the UK will no longer be able to set outside the EU and in a very weak bargaining position.

Schnitzler Hiyori Geta

ToBeFrank123 wrote: »

Pretty much everything is finger in the air stuff at this stage, unless you know otherwise?
Maybe you should answer your own questions.

Re the first one.
https://www.farmersjournal.ie/irish-beef-exports-in-2016-reached-highest-level-in-over-10-years-262212

Sorry, if you can't answer basic questions about how the Irish beef industry will be destroyed by no-deal Brexit, I am not sure what point there is in further discussing the matter with you. You made a claim, you back it up.

Unless the UK is going to magically produce all the beef it currently imports from Ireland or you know of some other country who will supply all the beef and there is some immediate trade deal possible, then your claim in rubbish I'm sorry to say.

No deal, tariffs are added.

UK customers must pay these tariffs or...

At best this means customers in the UK not buying beef as much.

They'll never reduce consumption to a level they are capable of supplying.

At worst, cheaper beef from outside the EU will be brought in. We just don't know what will happen. Although you seem to, so I'd be interested in your opinion on what will happen.

Your passive-aggression here is ultimately misplaced because you don't seem to know that it would be against WTO rules to bring in any beef at a lower tariff.

Schnitzler Hiyori Geta

ToBeFrank123 wrote: »

Maybe you should answer your own questions.

Fine.

1) You've answered;
2) Nowhere without imposing the same tariffs as Irish beef as per MFN principle of WTO trade terms;
3) If the WA is anything to go by, not quickly or easily... the UK would also need to have something that the other country wanted/needed in the deal which wouldn't hurt their domestic economy or interfere with other 3rd party trade deals - the vast majority of the top 15 beef exporting countries are in the EU or with 3rd countries with whom the EU has trade deals or US/Canada who won't want to harm their domestic production;
4) You heard of the EU-Japan trade deal? Japan is the second largest importing nation in the world after the US (see point 3 above re US domestic beef production vis-a-vis tariffs.

Akrasia

10000maniacs wrote: »

I'm not convinced by your argument that the option for a second referendum is not available anymore if there is an extension to Article 50. Can you explain why you think this is so.

May wants to extend to the shortest time possible, june has been the deadline spoken about. If May extends to June and the UK refuse to participate in EU elections then the EU won't extend the deadline again as it would make the new EU parliament constitutionally illegitimate. There is also a doubt over whether the UK will still be able to withdraw A50 during an extension period if they didn't participate in the EUparl elections

An Ciarraioch

The DUP backs the Costa amendment:

http://www.mydup.com/news/article/dup-support-costa-amendment

reslfj

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

The EU now know they have the upper hand and are keeping May's feet to the fire. When your opponent is in disarray, it's time to finish them off.

But the EU27 doesn't corner the UK. It gives the UK options - maybe not liked option - but realistic and possible options to choose from:

• Revoke A50
• Come op with a plan supported by a larger majority in parliament
• Ask the EU27 for a much longer continuation of A50 and ask for permission to (pre)negotiate the future FTA.

It is not easy to be a small state, but not being a nation united looks like a full UK disaster.

Lars

ToBeFrank123

Schnitzler Hiyori Geta wrote: »

Fine.

1) You've answered;
2) Nowhere without imposing the same tariffs as Irish beef as per MFN principle of WTO trade terms;
3) If the WA is anything to go by, not quickly or easily... the UK would also need to have something that the other country wanted/needed in the deal which wouldn't hurt their domestic economy or interfere with other 3rd party trade deals - the vast majority of the top 15 beef exporting countries are in the EU or with 3rd countries with whom the EU has trade deals or US/Canada who won't want to harm their domestic production;
4) You heard of the EU-Japan trade deal? Japan is the second largest importing nation in the world after the US (see point 3 above re US domestic beef production vis-a-vis tariffs.

And your overall point is? That a No Deal will be ok or bearable for Ireland?

There are many ways which it would not be.

In any case, let's hope it doesn't come to that and a deal is done and voted through the commons.

Leroy42

TM doesn't want to extend, she has talked non stop about not extending.

TM is being forced into this. The continued reporting of this as something that TM has any actual control over is really odd.

TM has been forced numerous times into u-turns, yesterdays announcement to the HoC being just the latest in a long line.

Laois_Man

Akrasia wrote: »

May wants to extend to the shortest time possible, june has been the deadline spoken about. If May extends to June and the UK refuse to participate in EU elections then the EU won't extend the deadline again as it would make the new EU parliament constitutionally illegitimate. There is also a doubt over whether the UK will still be able to withdraw A50 during an extension period if they didn't participate in the EUparl elections

Extending to June does not prohibit Labour from tabling a new referendum vote as they originally planned.

Also, there is nothing definite about the UK participating or not in the EU elections in May.

Macy0161

Akrasia wrote: »

There is also a doubt over whether the UK will still be able to withdraw A50 during an extension period if they didn't participate in the EUparl elections

Any links to that, as I can't find anything to suggest there's any change to the UK's right to withdraw Article 50. I agree it would cause an issue with the Parliament, but that doesn't mean their right to revoke has been removed as far as I can see?

Schnitzler Hiyori Geta

ToBeFrank123 wrote: »

And your overall point is?

That this statement is definitive:

ToBeFrank123 wrote: »

A No Deal crash out is very much a problem for the EU, particularly for Ireland where WTO tariffs will pretty much kill off our beef industry, unless the EU are prepared to stump up something like a billion more in subsidies for Irish beef farmers.

It's not based in any factual evidence or sure-footing. It's likely to be incorrect, and it's based on a flawed premise (or misunderstanding of WTO and tariffs).

That a No Deal will be ok or bearable for Ireland?

Impossible to say, but it certainly won't be as bad for the EU as it will for the UK. With US looking like recession is likely by 2021 and if there is political chaos there in the near future (possible) that could be as soon as Q4 2019 or 2020. Ireland learned from the last major US recession that they are not insulated - we shall see if we learned from the mistakes of the past or not very soon.

There are many ways which it would not be.

The one way you showed turned out to be easily debunked.

In any case, let's hope it doesn't come to that and a deal is done and voted through the commons.

I'm not sure what a deal will achieve at this stage. Unless that deal is SM/CU integration, I don't have great faith in the UK and EU negotiating a substantive trade deal after the UK leaves the EU based on the past 4 years.

ancapailldorcha

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

The EU now know they have the upper hand and are keeping May's feet to the fire. When your opponent is in disarray, it's time to finish them off.

The EU is supposed to be a peace project. A major military power departing and then going into recession isn't a good thing in that context even if it did hold an idiotic plebiscite to patch together one of its parties.

10000maniacs

Akrasia wrote: »

May wants to extend to the shortest time possible, june has been the deadline spoken about. If May extends to June and the UK refuse to participate in EU elections then the EU won't extend the deadline again as it would make the new EU parliament constitutionally illegitimate. There is also a doubt over whether the UK will still be able to withdraw A50 during an extension period if they didn't participate in the EUparl elections

But Merkel and Macron have already said that if the UK agrees to have a second referendum, the EU will give them all the time they need to do this.

Schnitzler Hiyori Geta

Macy0161 wrote: »

Any links to that, as I can't find anything to suggest there's any change to the UK's right to withdraw Article 50. I agree it would cause an issue with the Parliament, but that doesn't mean their right to revoke has been removed as far as I can see?

No, it's not correct - there is no limitation to withdrawal of Art 50 so long as it's done in good faith.

A Dub in Glasgo

https://twitter.com/Peston/status/1100764901541404672


The evidence thus far is that this will not pass because it is proposed by the SNP. Labour and the Tories have such snide disrespect for the majority of the MPs from Scotland

ToBeFrank123

Schnitzler Hiyori Geta wrote: »

That this statement is definitive:

It's not based in any factual evidence or sure-footing. It's likely to be incorrect, and it's based on a flawed premise (or misunderstanding of WTO and tariffs).


Impossible to say, but it certainly won't be as bad for the EU as it will for the UK. With US looking like recession is likely by 2021 and if there is political chaos there in the near future (possible) that could be as soon as Q4 2019 or 2020. Ireland learned from the last major US recession that they are not insulated - we shall see if we learned from the mistakes of the past or not very soon.


The one way you showed turned out to be easily debunked.


I'm not sure what a deal will achieve at this stage. Unless that deal is SM/CU integration, I don't have great faith in the UK and EU negotiating a substantive trade deal after the UK leaves the EU based on the past 4 years.

Ok next..

To avoid a hard border on this island, regulatory alignment will be required between northern and southern Ireland. Agreed?

I don't mind going through the implications of a no deal if you don't, although again no deal seems remote at this stage or at least the threat has lessened or been kicked down the road.

Schnitzler Hiyori Geta

ToBeFrank123 wrote: »

Ok next..

To avoid a hard border on this island, regulatory alignment will be required between northern and southern Ireland. Agreed?

Correct. I don't believe there is any factually supported debate on this. However, I believe even in the event of a trade deal which isn't in essence a single market deal, I don't see how a hard border can be avoided, deal or no deal.

I don't mind going through the implications of a no deal if you don't, although again no deal seems remote at this stage or at least the threat has lessened or been kicked down the road.

I don't believe no deal is any less likely than it was last week - which is why I posed the rhetorical question before "what has changed"?

Answer: nothing - this is a can kick down the road and no deal is just as likely after a 3 month extension than it is in one month.

ToBeFrank123

Regulatory alignment is a tough ask for the DUP to back - they said they won't. They are fools I know, we all know that. They'd rather cut off both arms and both legs and gouge out their eyes, just to remain in the Union. I suspect they will look for a big compensation package from the UK and/or EU to support regulatory alignment. I think we can all agree its finger in the air stuff. But I agree, I don't think 3 months postponement will make any difference.

My outside bet is the HoC will cop out of making a decision and hand that decision back to the people in the form of a second referendum. It gets everyone off the hook, but its a huge cop out. The EU have done what they are very good at, making it impossible for anyone to walk away. They really are similar to the mafia in that regard.

otnomart

An Ciarraioch wrote: »

Add Pedro Sanchez to the list:

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/feb/27/spanish-pm-warns-may-brexit-delay-with-no-plan-not-reasonable-or-desirable

Add Macron too
"France will block Brexit delay without 'new choice' by UK

French president’s comments come after Spain said it would demand conditions for article 50 extension"

otnomart

Interesting odds from Jon Worth:

• No Deal: 26%
• May's Deal: 20%
• General Election (inc. Art 50 extend): 19%
• 3 months extra spiral of tedium: 14%
• #PeoplesVote (inc. Art 50 extend): 12%
• EU offers 21 month extension, UK accepts: 8%

https://twitter.com/jonworth/status/1100687941578473473

jm08

youcantakethat wrote: »

I do not think they want to forget about the EU. They probably want to forget about helping to pay for the 200 Irish language translators in Brussels, and plenty more time wasters, but you are truly confused is you think they want to forget about the EU.

To get a translator job with the EU, you need to be able to work in 3 European languages.



The recent recruitment drive was for 72, not 200.

Akrasia

Laois_Man wrote: »

Extending to June does not prohibit Labour from tabling a new referendum vote as they originally planned.

Also, there is nothing definite about the UK participating or not in the EU elections in May.

An EU referendum would take at least 9 months and would require another extension to A50 which the EU would very likely balk at if the UK doesn't participate in the EU elections. They may refuse to allow the UK to revoke A50 as to do so might be 'an abuse of process' if it screws up the EU Parliament for the other 27 EU member states.

In order for the UK to participate in the EU elections, the HOC needs to to vote to enable this. May won't back this legislation given that she will call the June deadline the hard deadline and also say that there won't be a 2nd referendum or any further extension to A50 so taking part in the EU Parliament referendums would be a waste of time

All I'm saying is that May's end game is to remove the possibility of revoking A50, renegotiating the deal or holding a 2nd referendum. Whether this succeeds depends on what other forces do to intervene in the meantime