Brexit discussion thread IX (Please read OP before posting)

Patser

Sweet jesus, you have to despair for the UK. Here's one if their newly elected Brexit Party MEPs, calling for a randomly selected territorial water claim of 200 miles, and the sinking of any EU fishing boats by submarine attack if they enter, and some twitter responders are praising him, while others pointing out the madness of his claims are ignored.




https://twitter.com/RowlandBrexitSE/status/1148987466721964034

Spanish Eyes

To me anyway this whole Brexit mess has been allowed to romp away to ridiculous proportions purely because there has been no Opposition in Parliament at all up to now, and I doubt that will change.

I cannot understand the reluctance of Labour to engage and oppose, or get rid of the nemesis Corbyn. Who is running that show? Momentum I suppose, and that is working out well for them isn't it.

But no matter, it is great entertainment from this side of the pond looking at them all.

And before anyone lights on me, I do realise that Ireland North and South will suffer if No Deal Brexit happens.

But it looks inevitable to me now, unless Parliament decides otherwise. They have refused to back No Deal and the WA up to now. Two sides of the same aras.

reslfj

Igotadose wrote: »

So, that begs a question. If indeed on 31 October there's no WA signed,
are flights from the UK blocked from landing in the EU?
the trucks all get blocked? ships blocked from disembarking? drugs stop being shipped?
etc.
Overnight? Or does it gradually ramp down over a month or two?

In the case of a 'No Deal' Brexit customs/ trade procedures and tariffs do change 'Overnight'

The EU has however decided to unilaterally extend some permission by 9-12 months from March 29 - i.e. until Dec 31. 2019 or Mar 31. 2020.
No info yet on whether these end dates will be changed to 9-12 months after Oct 31. or the original dates will be used. The EU can end these rules without any warning.

Flights will be restricted to direct flights UK<->EU.
Existing flight schedules will be allowed to continue for a short time (a few months) post Brexit and then restricted in rest of the 12 months period post Brexit.

UK trucks can get fairly few permits to drive in the EU27 via an old pre EEC treaty. This old treaties covers only is ~5-10% of the permits currently used by UK long haul lorries.
The EU will allow EU type permits for another 9 months post Brexit.

Ships should be able to dock, but goods must undergo customs processing including inspection of goods and goods standards and goods safety. Tariffs will be payed from Brexit day.

Radioactive material (medicine) can't move outside EURATOM area without an agreement - to my understanding.

Drugs can be shipped to the UK, if the UK allows. For UK->EU27 medicine export any product must have been approved by the EMA.

Lars

Frank Bullitt

https://twitter.com/talkRADIO/status/1149026739781287937

Its the same stuff, everyday and night.

Stop moaning ffs

It’s a british border in Ireland.

They seem to forget that.

Gintonious

Gintonious wrote: »

https://twitter.com/talkRADIO/status/1149026739781287937

Its the same stuff, everyday and night.

Incredible to see someone that self-assured be that wrong.

Larbre34

Spanish Eyes wrote: »

But it looks inevitable to me now, unless Parliament decides otherwise. They have refused to back No Deal and the WA up to now. Two sides of the same aras.

There is no support in the places that matter for a no-deal Brexit; Parliament, Whitehall, Industry, Trade Unions, Banking, Academia, Science, Voluntary and Charity sectors and for that reason its never going to happen.

Yes the next logical change-up will be a general election, but with Labour going full remain and the Lib Dem magnetism for the young remain vote it'll likely end up as a hung parliament with a gutted Tories, Brexit Party, DUP and Labour rebels Vs rump Labour, Lib Dems, SNP, Plaid, Greens and maybe NI Alliance - with nobody exerting enough control to make any definitive steps.

If you gave me €1 and 1000/1 odds on a no deal, I'd pocket the quid. In my view right now, Brexit will never happen and if it does it will be BRINO and it certainly won't be on Halloween.

Hermy

DOCARCH wrote: »

The Tories don't appear to care! Both PM candidates seem to be quite willing to let businesses go down if that's what it takes to Brexit!

Bizarre that even business interests don't appear to cut the mustard with them.

Perhaps blinkered rather than blink is the operative word.

BonnieSituation

Stop moaning ffs wrote: »

It’s a british border in Ireland.

They seem to forget that.

Literally about to write this.

I consistently correct myself to saying the "British border in Ireland problem" when talking about Brexit just to highlight how ridiculous this nonsense is. There's one incredibly simple solution to this impasse...

FartyBlartFast

Patser wrote: »

Sweet jesus, you have to despair for the UK. Here's one if their newly elected Brexit Party MEPs, calling for a randomly selected territorial water claim of 200 miles, and the sinking of any EU fishing boats by submarine attack if they enter, and some twitter responders are praising him, while others pointing out the madness of his claims are ignored.




https://twitter.com/RowlandBrexitSE/status/1148987466721964034

I would absolutely love to know what this big tough man's military career history is.

Stop moaning ffs

BonnieSituation wrote: »

Literally about to write this.

I consistently correct myself to saying the "British border in Ireland problem" when talking about Brexit just to highlight how ridiculous this nonsense is. There's one incredibly simple solution to this impasse...

Matter of weeks if not days before it really comes up as the solution and they see the way out through dropping NI.
All of this. All of it. Could be resolved in minutes if it werent for the DUP.
Dump them. Move on without them into the WA.
The aftermath of that would be nothing compared to the fallout of a no deal.

When will they realise this? Why isn’t it even being mentioned?
Any day now it will be

20silkcut

Stop moaning ffs wrote: »

Matter of weeks if not days before it really comes up as the solution and they see the way out through dropping NI.
All of this. All of it. Could be resolved in minutes if it werent for the DUP.
Dump them. Move on without them into the WA.
The aftermath of that would be nothing compared to the fallout of a no deal.

When will they realise this? Why isn’t it even being mentioned?
Any day now it will be

The Brexiteers wont mention it because the scots will want the back stop extended to them I reckon.

Stop moaning ffs

20silkcut wrote: »

The Brexiteers wont mention it because the scots will want the back stop extended to them I reckon.

If that prevented them going for independence I could see that getting the snp on side to shore up the votes lost from the DUP to get it through

Peregrinus

20silkcut wrote: »

The Brexiteers wont mention it because the scots will want the back stop extended to them I reckon.

The EU has not offered an NI + Scotland backstop, and is unlikely to. It has stated all along that the backstop is possibly only because of the unique circumstances that prevail in NI.

volchitsa

Peregrinus wrote: »

The EU has not offered an NI + Scotland backstop, and is unlikely to. It has stated all along that the backstop is possibly only because of the unique circumstances that prevail in NI.

Then... Indy Ref 2 ?

Peregrinus

volchitsa wrote: »

Then... Indy Ref 2 ?

Very much a live issue, I would have thought.

Two possibilities:

1. Agains the odds, PM Johnson gets parliament to approve a WA including the NI backstop. Scotland is pissed since, despite voting against Brexit by an even bigger margin than NI, it doesn't get insulated from some of the worst effects of Brexit in the way NI does. But UK can reasonably say "EU wouldn't allow that." To which Scotland can reasonably say "How do you know that? You never asked."

Net result is that decision which is bad for Scotland has been imposed on Scotland against its expressed will. I don't think it really aggravates matters to observe that same decision has not be imposed in full-blooded form on NI. Truth is there are reasons why special treatment of NI was possible that don't apply with respect to Scotland.

But Scotland will observe (a) that lousy UK decision was not imposed on Ireland, and (b) that Ireland benefitted from strong support of EU in seeking to ensure, so far as possible, that adverse consequences of lousy UK decision did not end up being imposed on Ireland. Contrast between advantages of Irish independence within supportive EU versus disadvantages of Scottish dependence within oppressive UK is obvious, and striking. So political and popular case for Scottish independence is strengthened.

2. More likely, PM Johnson does not get any WA approved and (if we believe what he has been saying) result is that UK leaves without a deal on 31 October and of course with no NI backstop. Much pain, inc. for Scotland, but at least they do not see NI getting protections which are denied to them.

Still, contrast with Ireland's situation is just as obvious, and just as striking, so I would think there is a similar fillip to the case for Scottish independence.

But . . .

If UK leaves with a deal, consequence is not just that there is a backstop in NI. There is also a transitional period and (it is to be hoped) in due course a transition to a trade deal of some kind. Much less disruption and dislocation; much maintaining of equivalence, mutual recognition of standards, etc.

Whereas if no deal, big economic shock, and hard border not just in Ireland but between UK and EU at every level.

The big economic shock gives a big fillip to the case of for Scottish independence, but no-deal Brexuit also greatly increases the cost of Scottish independence, since if Scotland becomes independent there will then be a hard border between Scotland and the rump of the UK, and a huge chunk of Scottish trade passes over that border.

So you'd have a very unhealthy dynamic in which Scotland's reasons for dissatisfaction with the UK would be maximised, which would tend to encourage them to leave, but the cost to Scotland of leaving the UK would also be maximised, which would tend to encourage them to stay. Who is to say how that would balance out? The end result might be Scotland staying in the UK, but increasingly angry and bitter about it. It certainly doesn't make for a healthy UK.

20silkcut

Peregrinus wrote: »

The EU has not offered an NI + Scotland backstop, and is unlikely to. It has stated all along that the backstop is possibly only because of the unique circumstances that prevail in NI.

The EU should really push this as the only negotiable option between now and October. In light of the obviously unique circumstances in Northern Ireland and the fact that the Irish Sea is as natural a border as there is and causes the absolute least disruption. The scots should be given money from both EU and UK as part of the deal to shut up.
It worked before in the time of William Wallace.

Stop moaning ffs

Latest IT politics podcast is worth a listen.
Talk of nationalising the government here in case of a crash out.
First I’ve heard mention of that.
Fintan O Toole saying we’ve been doing really well on consensus and we must continue that at all costs and any party breaking out to score political points can’t and won’t be forgiven.
He’s not wrong.

LuckyLloyd

I would be strongly in favour of a national government (i.e. all parties contribute) in the event of Britain crashing out. We will have to treat the situation as a national crisis and act accordingly.

McMurphy

Simon Coveney has been on the airwaves non stop as past few days warning us about the Armageddon scenario that a no deal Brexit will bestow upon us.

The govt presumably are going to cancel their 2 month summer recess break then, yeah?

If engineers warned me that my house was about to collapse in on its own foundations, obviously my first thoughts would be, it'll be grand, I'll deal with it when I get back from the all inclusive in Kalamaki.....

Stop moaning ffs

As far as I know all parties are briefed regularly on the state of play. The FF brexit spokesperson was saying as much. She also very strongly said there’s just no way there’ll be a GE in the middle of all this and FF certainly won’t be pushing for one. She then went on to accuse SF of calling for one. But of course.
Don’t know we’d need to nationalise but we don’t know how bad or not the crash out scenario will be just yet.
I do hope the consensus continues though. It would be insanity to have them at each other’s throats. Brits would see that as cracks in the defence and come for it

Peregrinus

I don't know that we would need a national government. The problem with a national government is that there's no opposition to hold it to account. I think we are probably better off with a responsible and public-spirited opposition than with a national government.

(Yes, the UK had a national government during the war. But, then, they also suspended general elections. Nearly 10 years passed between the 1935 election and the 1945 election, and the government assumed sweeping powers; the UK was effectively a dictatorship during that period. If you're going to have a dictatorship then, yes, it's a good idea to involve as broad a range of political opinion in it so that there is some critical accountability within the dictatorship. But if you're going to have a government accountable to the electorate through elections then you're better off having an opposition, so that the people have a genuine choice of alternative governments at elections.)

lawred2

Johnny Dogs wrote: »

Simon Coveney has been on the airwaves non stop as past few days warning us about the Armageddon scenario that a no deal Brexit will bestow upon us.

The govt presumably are going to cancel their 2 month summer recess break then, yeah?

If engineers warned me that my house was about to collapse in on its own foundations, obviously my first thoughts would be, it'll be grand, I'll deal with it when I get back from the all inclusive in Kalamaki.....

The civil service will be doing the vast amount of heavy lifting re Brexit prep... And always have been. Parliament is for legislating. Even with a politician's summer recess the civil service will be flat out.

Zubeneschamali

Stop moaning ffs wrote: »

Talk of nationalising the government here in case of a crash out.

We already have a national government in practice: FG supported by FF.

The Independents in government and FF sitting on the opposition benches are just window dressing to keep FF/FG supporters who would balk at an actual coalition quiet.

Zubeneschamali

Peregrinus wrote: »

2. More likely, PM Johnson does not get any WA approved and (if we believe what he has been saying) result is that UK leaves without a deal on 31 October and of course with no NI backstop. Much pain, inc. for Scotland, but at least they do not see NI getting protections which are denied to them.

2.5: Not on Day One, but we all know that after the Independence Day celebrations, on Day Two Boris will have to open talks with the EU on the future trade relationship.

And item 3 on the list of things the EU want in return for a Free Trade Agreement will be the backstop. As the economic situation worsens, the UK government will come under irresistible pressure to make that deal.

And Scotland will be even worse off, having taken the hit from No Deal dislocation, and then seeing NI rescued by the EU.

Of course once the UK is out (especially on No Deal bad terms), the EU will be free to discuss fast-tracking an independent Scotland's re-entry, which might help the Indyref pass.

Peregrinus

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

2.5: Not on Day One, but we all know that after the Independence Day celebrations, on Day Two Boris will have to open talks with the EU on the future trade relationship.

Yes, the talks will open, but they are not talks which will close very quickly.

I don't really buy into the belief that no-deal Brexit will be so horrible for the UK that they will do an immediate volte-face and come running to look for the terms which they have so consistently rejected. It's extremely hard for people to admit they have made a mistake, and even harder when everyone pointed out at the time that they were making a mistake and they made it anyway. I think the rigours of no-deal Brexit will, at least for a time, simply entrench the positions people have already adopted and, rather than admit they are the authors of their own misfortune, they will blame the EU, the Irish, remainers, etc. That doesn't make for a climate in which the post-Brexit deal talks proceed smoothly or quickly.

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

And item 3 on the list of things the EU want in return for a Free Trade Agreement will be the backstop. As the economic situation worsens, the UK government will come under irresistible pressure to make that deal.

I think it may be more resistible than you think, at least for a time. Plus, it's a brand new deal; it's not simply a case of changing the opening paragraphs of the WA and offering it as the post-Brexit deal. Elements of the WA can be copied over, but large chunks will need to be negotiated from scratch.

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

And Scotland will be even worse off, having taken the hit from No Deal dislocation, and then seeing NI rescued by the EU.

That won't make Scotland worse off. In fact, a post-Brexit deal which effectively recreates the backstop is likely also to do other things which will ameliorate Scotland's plight.

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

Of course once the UK is out (especially on No Deal bad terms), the EU will be free to discuss fast-tracking an independent Scotland's re-entry, which might help the Indyref pass.

It might. But if the UK is out on bad no-deal terms, then Scotland seceding from the UK and joining the EU puts a huge barrier between Scotland and what will be far and away its largest import and export market; there'll be a hard border between Scotland and England. As pointed out earlier, a no-deal Brexit rubs Scotland's nose in its dependent condition, but also maximises the economic costs to Scotland of Scottish independence.

Zubeneschamali

Peregrinus wrote: »

Plus, it's a brand new deal; it's not simply a case of changing the opening paragraphs of the WA and offering it as the post-Brexit deal. Elements of the WA can be copied over, but large chunks will need to be negotiated from scratch.

I must admit that if I were the EUs trade negotiator, I would copy those three paragraphs and tell the UK side that those are a prerequisite for opening talks, that they will be the first three paragraphs of any deal that is agreed with the UK, ever.

Any Free Trade agreed will only begin after Westminster passes those 3 items into law and we see them implementing the backstop on the ground, guaranteeing EU citizens rights and they start paying what they owe.

Free trade will be suspended the day they break any of those conditions.

Professor Moriarty

Peregrinus wrote: »

Yes, the talks will open, but they are not talks which will close very quickly.

I don't really buy into the belief that no-deal Brexit will be so horrible for the UK that they will do an immediate volte-face and come running to look for the terms which they have so consistently rejected. It's extremely hard for people to admit they have made a mistake, and even harder when everyone pointed out at the time that they were making a mistake and they made it anyway. I think the rigours of no-deal Brexit will, at least for a time, simply entrench the positions people have already adopted and, rather than admit they are the authors of their own misfortune, they will blame the EU, the Irish, remainers, etc. That doesn't make for a climate in which the post-Brexit deal talks proceed smoothly or quickly.


I think it may be more resistible than you think, at least for a time. Plus, it's a brand new deal; it's not simply a case of changing the opening paragraphs of the WA and offering it as the post-Brexit deal. Elements of the WA can be copied over, but large chunks will need to be negotiated from scratch.


That won't make Scotland worse off. In fact, a post-Brexit deal which effectively recreates the backstop is likely also to do other things which will ameliorate Scotland's plight.


It might. But if the UK is out on bad no-deal terms, then Scotland seceding from the UK and joining the EU puts a huge barrier between Scotland and what will be far and away its largest import and export market; there'll be a hard border between Scotland and England. As pointed out earlier, a no-deal Brexit rubs Scotland's nose in its dependent condition, but also maximises the economic costs to Scotland of Scottish independence.

Current polls indicate that only 32% of people are in favour of a No Deal Brexit. This fact, along with the fact that No Deal will be an immediate economic disaster, will entrench people but will entrench EU supporters much more that Hard Brexit supporters.

Hurrache

Johnny Dogs wrote: »

Simon Coveney has been on the airwaves non stop as past few days warning us about the Armageddon scenario that a no deal Brexit will bestow upon us.

The govt presumably are going to cancel their 2 month summer recess break then, yeah?

If engineers warned me that my house was about to collapse in on its own foundations, obviously my first thoughts would be, it'll be grand, I'll deal with it when I get back from the all inclusive in Kalamaki.....

The dail may stop sitting, but the relevant departments, committees and civil servants won't stop working.

Same way the builders and engineers you employee to fix your house won't stop working just because you take a break and leave your house while they're at it.

Dytalus

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

Of course once the UK is out (especially on No Deal bad terms), the EU will be free to discuss fast-tracking an independent Scotland's re-entry, which might help the Indyref pass.

There's only so much the EU can do to fast-track Scottish membership though. Brexit, combined with independence, is going to do a number on Scotland's economy and make it very difficult to fulfill the criteria for EU membership. The EU would be making a very serious misstep to bend the rules to allow Scottish membership with a shaky, possibly imploded economy. It's not like NI and Ireland, where NI would be joining with a nation that's already a member. It would be just like Turkey wanting to join - a 3rd country, starting from scratch to meet the Copenhagen Criteria.

The first step would be an Association Agreement, the EU's tool for beginning the process. It wouldn't be too demanding, since Scotland is already aligned with the EU on market regulations and already (through the UK) is beholden to the ECJ. The main problem facing Scottish membership would be bolstering and stabilising their economy. There's only so much the EU can do there. Free Trade Agreements and trying for some generous investment (unsure what the EU could there - the ESIFunds can't be used for investing in 3rd party countries) would be the extent of it I'd imagine. Try to wean Scotland off its heavy dependence on England for trade and economic reliance.

It'd be a hard enough battle, but easier (and quicker) overall than some accessions. Scotland could effectively skip the political, regulatory, and individual freedom parts of the accession process because it's already in compliance with them. The economic fixing though, is mostly down to Scotland and cannot really be sped up.