Brexit discussion thread VII (Please read OP before posting)

VinLieger

Leroy42 wrote: »

But one also has to consider TM decision in terms of the electoral situation in the UK. According to many polls, there really isn't any potential cost to the Tory party in following this path. Labour are completely ineffectual, Corbyn is not liked or trusted and his front bench is clearly split (Starmer for example). But where else can voters look to? They really have little choice but one of those.

Its ludicrous that they are relying on that polling when the average brexiteer on the street shouting for no deal really has no clue how hard life is going to be when it actually happens.

Leroy42

VinLieger wrote: »

Its ludicrous that they are relying on that polling when the average brexiteer on the street shouting for no deal really has no clue how hard life is going to be when it actually happens.

True, but who are they going to turn when they realise?

Labour have done very little to put forward an alternative. At best they are arguing around the edges. Whilst many think Corbyn has played a god game in never getting tied to a position, he has also, IMO, lost a once in a lifetime opportunity to create clear daylight between the two parties.

Clearly Brexit has created a new voter dynamic. Previously it was Tory/Labour but now it appears to be Leave/Remain. Both Labour and Tory are primarily Leave and the smaller parties such as Lib-Dem has failed to get any traction.

And they, with a huge amount of help form the media, has played a very good game in shifting the blame. You simply have to read Downcows posts to realise just how effective it really is. Everything is the EU's fault, there is nothing to worry about and nobody ever wanted a backstop.

Do you think voters like Downcow are going to blame the DUP for any negative effects of Brexit? Or the rest of their voters? What about Tory safeseats. Does anybody really think that they will suddenly shift to Labour regardless of what happens? That is the reality of the situation in the UK.

And it is that context that one has to see where TM is coming from. Does she risk the breakup of her own party in order to achieve a soft Brexit or take the risk (which many senior Tories think is small) of a crash out but retain in party in one piece and suffer relatively minor political damage (if any) and certainly not long term.

prawnsambo

For those who might be looking for the definitive view of how the backstop is supposed to operate, this slide from the EU synopsis of the WA is pretty comprehensive. For example, it shows how the majority of NI trade goes through Liverpool rather than through Larne.

TRS30

If the EU keeps repeatedly stating it will not reopen the WA why do they continue to have 'talks'? Are they actually taking about other solutions to the Backstop or just sitting there nodding and then saying 'Thanks for coming however the deal is what it is'??

20silkcut

https://youtu.be/t9rv3Wqh4lQ


Farage badly exposed here. Clips like this should be on the main evening news rather than buried in obscurity on you tube.
He is absolute charlatan.

Leroy42

They are keeping the door open, there is always the possibility that the UK will come to an alternative arrangement.

There is still the issue of the PD, which is open for change, and the EU are open to discussion ways that that could be amended to help TM get the deal that she negotiated over the line.

One could almost see it as the EU trying it best to help the UK.

Of course that is completely wrong, the EU are simply trying to humiliate yet another Brexit secretary and are hell bent on destroying the UK.

prawnsambo

TRS30 wrote: »

If the EU keeps repeatedly stating it will not reopen the WA why do they continue to have 'talks'? Are they actually taking about other solutions to the Backstop or just sitting there nodding and then saying 'Thanks for coming however the deal is what it is'??

Well firstly, I don't think they are actually having talks. May is end-running the actual talks process by having chats with Juncker, Tusk and us. But there's no real substance to them and the only area that the EU are entertaining any 'talks' is on the 'political declaration on the framework for a future relationship'. Which is a pretty meaningless section of the WA. It's non-binding for a start.

Mr.Wemmick

TRS30 wrote: »

If the EU keeps repeatedly stating it will not reopen the WA why do they continue to have 'talks'? Are they actually taking about other solutions to the Backstop or just sitting there nodding and then saying 'Thanks for coming however the deal is what it is'??

Because they are being put into an impossible position by Theresa May. She is using the EU to appear proactive and forceful, yet she has nothing new to bring to the table and they are responding by politely playing along. If the do otherwise, she will use it against them by saying the EU refuse to meet; making an impossible situation hostile.

That is why I do not understand Tusk and his remark - totally unhelpful. The EU have the upper hand and have been patient and kind in their approach. Best to keep it that way, and to protect Ireland from a petulant blame-everyone-else UK government.

BonnieSituation

Folkstonian wrote: »

As above. There has been no formal request to reject.

May is probably correct that the timing is not right. The civil service on Whitehall has no resilience to deal with Scottish separation currently. It’s simply not practical because all hands are already on deck because of Brexit.

Yet again the "best civil service in the world" and its incompetence getting in the way of its citizenry and their wishes. :0

ambro25

Mr.Wemmick wrote: »

Because they are being put into an impossible position by Theresa May. She is using the EU to appear proactive and forceful, yet she has nothing new to bring to the table and they are responding by politely playing along. If the do otherwise, she will use it against them by saying the EU refuse to meet; making an impossible situation hostile.

That is why I do not understand Tusk and his remark - totally unhelpful. The EU have the upper hand and have been patient and kind in their approach. Best to keep it that way, and to protect Ireland from a petulant blame-everyone-else UK government.

He (and every other EU27 head of state and heavy EU players like Juncker, Verhofstadt and Barnier) knows May is playing the clock.

His remark must be assessed in that context, already long certain in the knowledge that the EU will be blamed no matter what.

Do nothing and let a no deal outcome play out. Because the EU cannot shift from the WA, unless May -now quite clearly unfirable until B day- rows back on her red line(s), and that won't happen because political snooker in the UK.

Do something and maybe, just maybe, some political dynamic spins up and begins to unf*** the political snooker in the UK.

He'll have the EU under his tenure remembered (across the EU27, the 48% and the RoW) as the party which was reasonable, helpful and which kept trying.

May will be remembered by the 100k Tory membership as the PM which stopped her party imploding before Brexit and, in due course, by pretty much everybody else, as the PM which threw the UK under the bus for the sake of party politics.

I don't despair of seeing her vilified worse than Thatcher and Blair put together in years to come. Thoroughly deserved, too.

Zubeneschamali

Leroy42 wrote: »

They have convinced themselves that a No Deal isn't really that bad.

That is possible, but I still think it is more likely that May&Co. are spreading these rumours in order to try and convince us they are not bluffing.


But the EU really, really aren't bluffing, so May will fold.

Zubeneschamali

Looking back, I see that in November before the final WA was on the table, I said:
We all know what the deal is - a long transition to Canada+ via an all-UK Customs Union with a carve-out for NI as a backstop. This has been clear since the EU said an all-UK customs deal was on the table.

May goes to Parliament with this deal at the last minute, and says "We have fought the good fight and negotiated the best deal possible for the UK, winning concessions from the EU which no-one thought possible at the outset. This is not only the best deal, it is now the only deal - it is this deal or Mad Max time."

I think that is still the most likely outcome, but it only works if May gets right into March without Parliament taking Brexit out of her hands to get No Deal off the table. If that happens, Brexit may still be cancelled altogether.

mrbrianj

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

Well, now, I think that is a bit too optimistic.

The CTA is exactly the kind of agreement that downcow likes - a gentleman's agreement honoured by both sides as long as they feel like it, which the UK could destroy at the stroke of a pen without agreement from anyone else.

If a No Deal Brexit actually happens, and some May-type Home Secretary gets the job of keeping EU citizens out, the CTA is going to stand out as a problem.

The problem with the CTA is that up to now Ireland and the UK had always had the same relationship with the EU. We either were in or not at the same time - so it did not effect the CTA.

Now for the first time our relationship via the EU has changed - can the CTA survive that?

Mr.Wemmick

ambro25 wrote: »

He (and every other EU27 head of state and heavy EU players like Juncker, Verhofstadt and Barnier) knows May is playing the clock.

His remark must be assessed in that context, already long certain in the knowledge that the EU will be blamed no matter what.

Do nothing and let a no deal outcome play out. Because the EU cannot shift from the WA, unless May -now quite clearly unfirable until B day- rows back on her red line(s), and that won't happen because political snooker in the UK.

Do something and maybe, just maybe, some political dynamic spins up and begins to unf*** the political snooker in the UK.

He'll have the EU under his tenure remembered (across the EU27, the 48% and the RoW) as the party which was reasonable, helpful and which kept trying.

May will be remembered by the 100k Tory membership as the PM which stopped her party imploding before Brexit and, in due course, by pretty much everybody else, as the PM which threw the UK under the bus for the sake of party politics.

I don't despair of seeing her vilified worse than Thatcher and Blair put together in years to come. Thoroughly deserved, too.

Agreed.

Brexit: a Tory project created purely to benefit the Tories.. and, yes, nothing else in the land matters.

And a special mention to Corbyn, the f*wit who helped them.

Water John

Zubes, that is obviously TM's game. Run down the clock, Her Deal or No Deal with 48 hours to go. It's up to the HOC to stop this. There are combinations or a series of events that would eliminate that option for her. A rerun of both Cooper' and Grieve's motions or similar might get a different result by the End of Feb.
That other option of voting Her Deal through and then finally putting that to the people has a similar prospect. Then it's Her Deal or No Brexit.

jm08

downcow wrote: »

I think the backstop will be softened allowing deal to go through

I like to see EU Ire & UK to stop all the nonsense and make the thing work and stop worrying that if UK ends up happy then others will leave

I have friends involved in GAA and if i can use it as a metaphor. For years GAA made life difficult for young people who wanted to play soccer or rugby on a Saturday. This was no doubt from a place of insecurity. I believe that has now transformed and large numbers of young people are choosing gaa over other sports. Create a easy to leave option in EU and maybe the countries will all want to stay - but if they choose to go then that is their choice and dobn't stand in their way

The reason why young people play GAA is because the GAA has by far the best facilities to be able to provide them. Every village in Ireland has a GAA club with decent facilities unlike soccer or rugby.

Peregrinus

TRS30 wrote: »

If the EU keeps repeatedly stating it will not reopen the WA why do they continue to have 'talks'? Are they actually taking about other solutions to the Backstop or just sitting there nodding and then saying 'Thanks for coming however the deal is what it is'??

Mostly the latter. They don't want to be seen to be the party that refuses to talk, since that would lend a scoring point to the Brexity "It's all the fault of EU intransigence!" line. So as long as May keeps knocking on the door, they'll keep putting on the kettle.


But not completely the latter. They're not just saying "we won't reopen the Withdrawal Agreement"; they are also saying "We coud to this or this in the Political Declaration; that should help". And they are pointing out to May that the Labour Party has signalled a willingness to agree to a Brexit on terms not a thousand miles from her deal, so if she is serious about looking for a majority in Parliament, she should be looking to groups whose position is close to her deal, and not groups who have sworn a black oath of eternal vengeance on her deal.

mrbrianj

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

Looking back, I see that in November before the final WA was on the table, I said:
We all know what the deal is - a long transition to Canada+ via an all-UK Customs Union with a carve-out for NI as a backstop. This has been clear since the EU said an all-UK customs deal was on the table.

May goes to Parliament with this deal at the last minute, and says "We have fought the good fight and negotiated the best deal possible for the UK, winning concessions from the EU which no-one thought possible at the outset. This is not only the best deal, it is now the only deal - it is this deal or Mad Max time."

I think that is still the most likely outcome, but it only works if May gets right into March without Parliament taking Brexit out of her hands to get No Deal off the table. If that happens, Brexit may still be cancelled altogether.

I have a feeling that may be a bit too sensible of a tactic! (although I hope not)

My fear is that TM knows that she cant deliver a Brexit that will keep UK working AND satisfy the Brexiteers - she will be forever be blamed for her bad deal, - but if she takes a no deal brexit she can hold her hands up a say she delivered on the peoples vote, she campaigned against it be did give them what they asked for, the only vague hope left for her party.

seamus

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

I think that is still the most likely outcome, but it only works if May gets right into March without Parliament taking Brexit out of her hands to get No Deal off the table. If that happens, Brexit may still be cancelled altogether.

One problem is that lots of people assume that it's a case of bringing it right to the wire. Do a deal on 25th March, phew! Disaster averted!

But it forgets that about 45% of what the UK trades, is carried by sea. That's not overnight.

In fact, there are ships leaving the UK this week for China, which will arrive after 29th March. They have no idea what to expect when they arrive (likewise for UK-bound Chinese ships). In fact, nobody can tell them.

There are good chances that the closer we get to the 29th, more and more shippers will start to redirect UK-bound ships to an EU port to wait and see. Or just not embark at all, instead opting to leave the stuff in port until they know what paperwork will be required at the destination.

This means that regardless of whether there's a deal, no deal or no brexit, if they let it come down to the wire the UK could see a week or two of shortages across the board. Which will be another massive economic blow.

Peregrinus

downcow wrote: »

I think the backstop will be softened allowing deal to go through

I like to see EU Ire & UK to stop all the nonsense and make the thing work and stop worrying that if UK ends up happy then others will leave

I have friends involved in GAA and if i can use it as a metaphor. For years GAA made life difficult for young people who wanted to play soccer or rugby on a Saturday. This was no doubt from a place of insecurity. I believe that has now transformed and large numbers of young people are choosing gaa over other sports. Create a easy to leave option in EU and maybe the countries will all want to stay - but if they choose to go then that is their choice and dobn't stand in their way

There is an easy option to leave - Article 50. A country can take the option unilaterally, and it doesn't need any permission from or agreement with the EU or with any other EU member state. I don't see how it could possibly be any easier.


What is less easy is living with the consequences of leaving.

Leroy42

seamus wrote: »

One problem is that lots of people assume that it's a case of bringing it right to the wire. Do a deal on 25th March, phew! Disaster averted!

But it forgets that about 45% of what the UK trades, is carried by sea. That's not overnight.

In fact, there are ships leaving the UK this week for China, which will arrive after 29th March. They have no idea what to expect when they arrive (likewise for UK-bound Chinese ships). In fact, nobody can tell them.

There are good chances that the closer we get to the 29th, more and more shippers will start to redirect UK-bound ships to an EU port to wait and see. Or just not embark at all, instead opting to leave the stuff in port until they know what paperwork will be required at the destination.

This means that regardless of whether there's a deal, no deal or no brexit, if they let it come down to the wire the UK could see a week or two of shortages across the board. Which will be another massive economic blow.

There was s short sub-segment on this on C4 news last night. A UK company buying stuff (bicycle lights) next order would not arrive from China until after 29th March and thus they had no idea what was going to happen, what tariffs would be imposed, what the delay would be etc.

Yesterdays GDP report, and particularly the investment section of it, should have sent shockwaves through the UK and the media should have been all over the Chancellor. Instead we got a soft soap interview where he simply said Brexit needs to be delivered and then everything will be just fine.

Leroy42

Andrea Leadsom gave an interview today.

The main points

• Leadsom....hinted that the UK was no longer pushing for actual changes to the withdrawal agreement as the means of resolving the backstop issue.
• She did not rule out that possibility that the final vote on the Brexit deal could be held in the week before the UK is due to leave the EU on 29 March

So they are not even bothering (with good reason) to try to get any changes to the WA. So it is either Backstop or No Deal.

Thus we can stop all the talk of Ireland being thrown under the bus by the EU, it is not going to happen and the UK are not even trying.
Begs the question as to what exactly TM was doing whipping all the MPs to support the Brady amendment when she has done nothing about it, and what exactly the 'Alternative proposals' working group, or whatever they are calling themselves are doing.

Kermit.de.frog

Leadsom basically admitted on bbc this morning that there won't be changes to the WA and backstop and the best they can hope for is some reassurance tact on outside the agreement or something in the non legally binding political declaration.

prawnsambo

Leroy42 wrote: »

There was s short sub-segment on this on C4 news last night. A UK company buying stuff (bicycle lights) next order would not arrive from China until after 29th March and thus they had no idea what was going to happen, what tariffs would be imposed, what the delay would be etc.

And that's probably one of the easiest import situations envisaged, since there are already tariff barriers between the UK and China. At least the procedures are the same even if the tariffs might change. And of course delays are inevitable. Unless these guys are buying in the mother of all consignments of bicycle lights, they're unlikely to be in a full container load and more likely to be in a groupage container. Which means that somebody else making a cock up of the paperwork on their consignment, could hold up the entire container for days.

prawnsambo

Leroy42 wrote: »

Begs the question as to what exactly TM was doing whipping all the MPs to support the Brady amendment when she has done nothing about it, and what exactly the 'Alternative proposals' working group, or whatever they are calling themselves are doing.

Andrew Adonis is running a countdown on Twitter to keep us all apprised of developments or lack thereof.

breatheme

mrbrianj wrote: »

The problem with the CTA is that up to now Ireland and the UK had always had the same relationship with the EU. We either were in or not at the same time - so it did not effect the CTA.

Now for the first time our relationship via the EU has changed - can the CTA survive that?

The CTA itself as a concept can survive. No checks on passports between Ireland and UK.

There are several checks carried on at a border:

1. Passport checks; can you come in with this passport? Do you need a visa?
2. Checking goods; can you bring in these goods into the country? Do you need to pay VAT on them? Do you need to declare them?
3. Capital flows; can you come in with this amount of money? Do you need to declare it? Do you need to pay some it at customs?

The EU eliminates (2) and (3). The CTA eliminates (1).

The CTA can survive. Imagine this, when you cross from Ireland into NI, you get your boot opened up and checked and you have to fill in a form if you bring in money that is more than 10000 pounds.

Then you are checking for (2) and (3), but if you don't require that the person show a passport, you're not checking for (1) and the CTA has survived.

This is what people mean when they say "we had the CTA before the EU" because even though there were customs checks, people could cross the border without a passport (i.e. with a driver's license).

The CTA is not actually agreed on paper anywhere. And as long as Irish citizens can enter the UK without a passport and vice-versa (which is currently not under threat) then the CTA "survives" even if the open border doesn't.

This is not about the CTA, it's about the border.

Leroy42

it is not that the CTA cannot survive, it question is will it?

Nothing the UK have done in the last few years gives me confidence that it will survive given that the conditions it was created in have changed so dramatically. At this is not just a UK issue, it could conceivable become a ROI issue as well.

Given that a massive amount of Brexit is based on immigration, is it really feasible that GB will continue to let people freely travel from Dublin to Belfast and then into Liverpool without any checks at all. What is to stop a EU citizens from declarig they lived in Ireland for a week and thus allow them to start the 90 day period of FOM again.

Brexit has opened up a pandoras box, one which IMO is going to cost NI dearly no matter what happens.

Leroy42

Taken from the Guardians Live Politics blog, so don't have direct link to the tweet;

Steven Swinford
(@Steven_Swinford)
New:

Cabinet has broken up and there was no discussion about Brexit AT ALL

One minister said it was 'utterly surreal', one of shortest meetings they can remember

There were discussions on fly-tipping & child poverty targets (figures don't look good in March)

But that was it.

So they are not trying, per Leadsom, to change the WA. They are not going to hold a vote until late March. What exactly are the UK Government actually doing?

breatheme

Leroy42 wrote: »

it is not that the CTA cannot survive, it question is will it?

Nothing the UK have done in the last few years gives me confidence that it will survive given that the conditions it was created in have changed so dramatically. At this is not just a UK issue, it could conceivable become a ROI issue as well.

Given that a massive amount of Brexit is based on immigration, is it really feasible that GB will continue to let people freely travel from Dublin to Belfast and then into Liverpool without any checks at all. What is to stop a EU citizens from declarig they lived in Ireland for a week and thus allow them to start the 90 day period of FOM again.

Brexit has opened up a pandoras box, one which IMO is going to cost NI dearly no matter what happens.

And also the fact that an EU Citizen can enter Ireland with only their identity card and no passport. And even if they do enter with a passport, they don't get a stamp. The CTA has always been oddly asymmetrical (which is why, it currently doesn't actually work, e.g. a South African can enter Ireland and then the UK but not vice versa) and it's about to get even more asymmetrical.

Zubeneschamali

Leroy42 wrote: »

Begs the question as to what exactly TM was doing

What she has been doing since November when the WA was finalized - looking busy and running down the clock until MPs have to choose between her deal and No Deal.