Brexit discussion thread IX (Please read OP before posting)

J Mysterio

Asitis2019 wrote: »

Why is our own parliament not sitting for a full eight weeks. It is ridiculous that parliament resumes only a couple of weeks before the budget and six weeks before Brexit.

Not much for us to discuss RE Brexit to be fair. Ball is firmly in the UK's court. Almost feels like nothing is worth talking about besides as this is the major issue of the day and changes everything.

We are currently just past the mid point of the 2nd extension granted the UK in their application to leave the EU under the formal article 50 process.

April, May, June, and half of July gone. August, September and October left. The Tory leader will be decided soon and we can look forward to a triumphal parade and lots of fist waving.

Use this time wisely said Tusk...

Strazdas

A Dub in Glasgo wrote: »

Hunt and Johnson are leading the UK up the garden path on the backstop

It does tend to rubbish the 'Ireland should have conceded on the backstop' stuff. Weren't Dan O'Brien & Co saying we should have offered concessions like a time limit etc? Now Hunt and Johnson are saying even that wouldn't be acceptable to them.

J Mysterio

Strazdas wrote: »

It does tend to rubbish the 'Ireland should have conceded on the backstop' stuff. Weren't Dan O'Brien & Co saying we should have offered concessions like a time limit etc? Now Hunt and Johnson are saying even that wouldn't be acceptable to them.

It seems shocking that they have said this. You just feel as though it has been just casually thrown that out there: "oh, I would never accept a backstop". Eh... this is a fundamental principle underpinning the WA.

As far as I'm aware, the EU have stated unequivocally(?) that there will be no third extension if not for a very good reason e.g. a second referendum or a GE.

The big question is the potential of further extensions though, I suppose. The EU is still surviving and continuing in its work, despite "the saboteurs". Might they, on the EU side, actually be prepared to draw this out for some time? In theory, the longer the issue is drawn out, the more desperate it becomes for the UK as regards the uncertainty etc. It is not quite as painful in for the EU.

As time passes and matters become more clear, the truth really dawns, or it should trickle down eventually. Already opinion polls are swinging. This might yet all be stopped and be a terribly embarrassing situation that we should all forget about and never mention, like 'the war'.

But a potential 3rd extension? It would potentially become an election of Johnson Tory Brexit V Corbyn Labour Brexit, and at that point there would have to be detail on both sides. If at all possible.

Strazdas

J Mysterio wrote: »

It seems shocking that they have said this. You just feel as though it has been just casually thrown that out there: "oh, I would never accept a backstop". Eh... this is a fundamental principle underpinning the WA.

As far as I'm aware, the EU have stated unequivocally(?) that there will be no third extension if not for a very good reason e.g. a second referendum or a GE.

The big question is the potential of further extensions though, I suppose. The EU is still surviving and continuing in its work, despite "the saboteurs". Might they, on the EU side, actually be prepared to draw this out for some time? In theory, the longer the issue is drawn out, the more desperate it becomes for the UK as regards the uncertainty etc. It is not quite as painful in for the EU.

As time passes and matters become more clear, the truth really dawns, or it should trickle down eventually. Already opinion polls are swinging. This might yet all be stopped and be a terribly embarrassing situation that we should all forget about and never mention, like 'the war'.

But a potential 3rd extension? It would potentially become an election of Johnson Tory Brexit V Corbyn Labour Brexit, and at that point there would have to be detail on both sides. If at all possible.

Well at least Johnson and Hunt are now admitting that the "concession" they want from the EU is for the backstop to be ditched completely and never mentioned again.

There is a school of thought of course that this is all a big bluff by Johnson and he will say anything to become PM. Goodness knows what will happen in the autumn. He is a slippery customer and it's anyone's guess what he is really up to.

Mr.Nice Guy

Strazdas wrote:

It does tend to rubbish the 'Ireland should have conceded on the backstop' stuff. Weren't Dan O'Brien & Co saying we should have offered concessions like a time limit etc? Now Hunt and Johnson are saying even that wouldn't be acceptable to them

It was the DUP position as well, which makes these pronouncements by Johnson and Hunt very interesting.

...a senior lawmaker from Northern Ireland’s Democratic Unionist Party, which props up the Conservatives in parliament and opposed May’s deal, said last month the party was not looking for “earth-shattering” changes to the backstop.

https://www.reuters.com/article/uk-britain-eu-leader-backstop-idUSKCN1UA24W?utm_campaign

And this was Jeffrey Donaldson speaking to RTE last month:

He said he is asking for a time frame on the back stop so people will know that it is temporary and not indefinite.

“The Irish Government is refusing to budge on the time scale. That’s the only problem. (British) parliament could agree if that was removed,” he said.

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/politics/brexit-ireland-created-backstop-impasse-says-donaldson-1.3925602

Uh oh. Not been a good week for Arlene and co.

I'm curious to hear how they will work their way around this latest development because they're now propping up a government intent on putting NI through the most painful Brexit possible.

marno21

There needs to be a revolt in the Labour Party. This circus in the Tory party has been unopposed for far too long.

A proper leader who can actually lead would have ripped these fools to bits at this stage.

Strazdas

Mr.Nice Guy wrote: »

It was the DUP position as well, which makes these pronouncements by Johnson and Hunt very interesting.



And this was Jeffrey Donaldson speaking to RTE last month:



Uh oh. Not been a good week for Arlene and co.

I'm curious to hear how they will work their way around this latest development because they're now propping up a government intent on putting NI through the most painful Brexit possible.

Good spot. It shows that the DUP red lines and the Johnson / Hunt red lines on the backstop are two completely different things.

It also wrong foots everyone in Ireland who claimed the Irish Govt were intransigent and would cause No Deal to happen

Peregrinus

Leroy42 wrote: »

Gove and Johnson have noth stated that a time limit or a unilateral right to exit from the backstop does not improve it.

Thus only a removal will do.

No deal it is.

Ah. But time limits and unilateral exit rights are not on offer. Nor were they ever likely to be.

It costs Johnson and Hunt nothing to reject what is not on offer, and it makes them look hard - at least, in the eyes of the audience that they are currently pitching to.

And, arguably, the more they establish themselves as "hard", the easier it is for them later to sell a necessary compromise, on the thinking that if a committed hard brexiter tells you some compromise is necessary, it really is necessary.

Nody

"Strazdas wrote: »

It also wrong foots everyone in Ireland who claimed the Irish Govt were intransigent and would cause No Deal to happen

Sorry but this is Brexit, the tune will now change to It's Ireland's fault for not accepting the generous technology solutions offered by UK that's the reason for No Deal happening. Remember it's always someone else's fault and facts have no place in these arguments.

Leroy42

Peregrinus wrote: »

Leroy42 wrote: »

Gove and Johnson have noth stated that a time limit or a unilateral right to exit from the backstop does not improve it.

Thus only a removal will do.

No deal it is.

Ah. But time limits and unilateral exit rights are not on offer. Nor were they ever likely to be.

It costs Johnson and Hunt nothing to reject what is not on offer, and it makes them look hard - at least, in the eyes of the audience that they are currently pitching to.

And, arguably, the more they establish themselves as "hard", the easier it is for them later to sell a necessary compromise, on the thinking that if a committed hard brexiter tells you some compromise is necessary, it really is necessary.

Totally agree but what it does do, as alluded to in previous posts, is remove that area of uncertainty and blame. There was always this talk about time limits and need for opt out which the EU were being intransigent for not discussing.

But clearly, and many knew this was the case already including I suspect the EU, this means that there really is nothing to renegotiate.

It has completely removed any potential pressure from Ireland regarding the backstop as what the UK are asking for is to basically be absolved of any rules.

amacca

J Mysterio wrote: »

The big question is the potential of further extensions though, I suppose. The EU is still surviving and continuing in its work, despite "the saboteurs". Might they, on the EU side, actually be prepared to draw this out for some time? In theory, the longer the issue is drawn out, the more desperate it becomes for the UK as regards the uncertainty etc. It is not quite as painful in for the EU.

Is the uncertainty for the EU side what might happen with Italian economy etc, instability, potential further break up or have countries/electorates like that looked at the UK's experience so far and are not anxious to go down that path despite the rise of populism etc

sandbelter

Leroy42 wrote: »

Totally agree but what it does do, as alluded to in previous posts, is remove that area of uncertainty and blame. There was always this talk about time limits and need for opt out which the EU were being intransigent for not discussing.

But clearly, and many knew this was the case already including I suspect the EU, this means that there really is nothing to renegotiate.

It has completely removed any potential pressure from Ireland regarding the backstop as what the UK are asking for is to basically be absolved of any rules.

I think what's going in Cyprus with Turkey's gas drilling in Cypriot waters is probably becoming more pressing with every passing day.

Stop moaning ffs

New EU president saying she’s willing to grant the uk a further extension.

Tell me how

Stop moaning ffs wrote: »

New EU president saying she’s willing to grant the uk a further extension.

It won't be to just allow the UK to sit on their hands that's for sure.
Without saying anything, she may know that that would probably lead to a GE anyway.

Peregrinus

amacca wrote: »

Is the uncertainty for the EU side what might happen with Italian economy etc, instability, potential further break up or have countries/electorates like that looked at the UK's experience so far and are not anxious to go down that path despite the rise of populism etc

It's more the EU's own affairs. The longer Brexit drags on, the more time, effort, energy and emotional and political capital the EU needs to spend to keep attending to the problem, and the less time, etc, they have to deal with other business. This remains true regardless of whether the other business is dramatic or routine.

Plus, the longer it drags on, the more problems it's dragging on starts to throw up, so the amount of time, etc that Brexit consumes gets larger and larger. For example early in 2020 the EU starts planning and negotiating for its next 7-year budget, which runs from 1 January 2021. That will be hugely complicated if there is any uncertainty at all about whether the UK will or will not be contributing during that budgetary cycle, or benefitting from any of the plans and programmes that it will finance. Up to now, this hasn't been an issue - the 2014-20 budget allowed for UK participation. But it becomes an issue if the UK doesn't shlt or get off the pot in the next few months.

Peregrinus

Stop moaning ffs wrote: »

New EU president saying she’s willing to grant the uk a further extension.

Not up to her. She's not the "EU President" she's the nominee for President of the Commission, but (assuming the UK asks for an extension) a decision about granting it will be made by the Council, not the Commission. She could influence the decision, in that if she recommended against it then the Council would almost certainly not grant it. But the reverse is not true; even if the UK asks and she recommends that it be granted, the Council could very easily decide not to grant it, or to only to grant a more limited extension than is sought.

Leroy42

Stop moaning ffs wrote: »

New EU president saying she’s willing to grant the uk a further extension.

Yeah, it makes perfect sense. That is the usual 11th hour that the UK have mixed up with changing their position. The EU are past masters at pushing things down the road rather than have conflict, it really is the only way when dealing with so many countries and so many different agendas.

So whilst I personally do not see either the point or even the 'fairness' of another extension, I fully appreciate that the EU see it as the least worst option.

Whilst the BP and the Tories continue to appear to be heading further towards No Deal rather than away, I do get the impression that an increasing amount of people in the UK see Brexit for what it is and each passing week gives them more evidence of what the reality is (Trump ambassador etc).

An extension costs the EU relatively little (there are some costs to the continuing uncertainty and the long term effect if other countries want to leave and feel there are no time frames) but they are minor compared to the large negative effect of a crash out.

Cryptopagan

Peregrinus wrote: »

Ah. But time limits and unilateral exit rights are not on offer. Nor were they ever likely to be.

It costs Johnson and Hunt nothing to reject what is not on offer, and it makes them look hard - at least, in the eyes of the audience that they are currently pitching to.

And, arguably, the more they establish themselves as "hard", the easier it is for them later to sell a necessary compromise, on the thinking that if a committed hard brexiter tells you some compromise is necessary, it really is necessary.

How can you sell the backstop on offer as a compromise when you’ve already ruled out a time-limited one as unacceptable? It would surely be perceived as a u-turn.

ancapailldorcha

Stop moaning ffs wrote: »

New EU president saying she’s willing to grant the uk a further extension.

Van der Leyen has not been confirmed as EU Commission president yet though it seems a shoe-in at this stage.

The Independent opened with this:

The woman lined up to replace Jean-Claude Juncker as European Union commission president has said she is open to extending Brexit talks past October, a letter seen by The Independent reveals.

Ursula von der Leyen, who was tapped by member states for the top job in Brussels, said she would “support a further extension if good reasons are provided” beyond the current deadline. But the German politician was emphatic she would not change the deal struck by Theresa May, adding: “The withdrawal agreement negotiated with the United Kingdom is the best and only possible deal for an orderly withdrawal.”

I'm grateful that she has said this but all it really is is a restatement of the EU's position which has been consistent from day one. They won't facilitate the Tories' silly games but will accommodate genuine change.

Leroy42

As another posters mentioned, the offer of an extension is pretty cost free to the EU. EU are seen as being willing to work with the UK, whilst Johnson and Hunt have painted themselves (particularly Johnson) into such a corner that to accept the extension would basically mean a GE.

Professor Moriarty

Peregrinus wrote: »

Not up to her. She's not the "EU President" she's the nominee for President of the Commission, but (assuming the UK asks for an extension) a decision about granting it will be made by the Council, not the Commission. She could influence the decision, in that if she recommended against it then the Council would almost certainly not grant it. But the reverse is not true; even if the UK asks and she recommends that it be granted, the Council could very easily decide not to grant it, or to only to grant a more limited extension than is sought.

It appears to hinge on Macron. Very reluctantly, he agreed to the last extension as being the "final final extension". He seems to have changed his tune recently saying that a second referendum would be grounds for a new extension, but given the nature of French politics these days, he won't want to be seen as soft - especially in the context of dealing with a populist like Johnson.

ancapailldorcha

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

It appears to hinge on Macron. Very reluctantly, he agreed to the last extension as being the "final final extension". He seems to have changed his tune recently saying that a second referendum would be grounds for a new extension, but given the nature of French politics these days, he won't want to be seen as soft - especially in the context of dealing with a populist like Johnson.

The irony of him wielding such influence on the EU does grate on me though. I mean, fair play to him for actually showing leadership at the European level and using his influence in such a canny manner. The issue is I'm on the wrong horse.

Professor Moriarty

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

The irony of him wielding such influence on the EU does grate on me though. I mean, fair play to him for actually showing leadership at the European level and using his influence in such a canny manner. The issue is I'm on the wrong horse.

How do you mean you're on the wrong horse?

ancapailldorcha

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

How do you mean you're on the wrong horse?

I live in London.

Professor Moriarty

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

I live in London.

Ah right! Well, your former mayor is about to get a chance to show his Churchillian qualities. Though I think Macron and Merkel would buy and sell him. Bluff and bluster really doesn't cut it when the adults start talking. And the thought of Johnson trying to intimidate Barnier or Verhofstadt, by table thumping and "full-throated" argument, is amusing.

Tell me how

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

Ah right! Well, your former mayor is about to get a chance to show his Churchillian qualities. Though I think Macron and Merkel would buy and sell him. Bluff and bluster really doesn't cut it when the adults start talking. And the thought of Johnson trying to intimidate Barnier or Verhofstadt, by table thumping and "full-throated" argument, is amusing.

Merkel is pretty much out of the sphere of influence now already. She has already announced her departure date and successor. Recent health indicators may bring forward her stepping down.

Mores the pity. She understands better than anyone the purpose of the EU in promoting peace and cohesion. An example of someone with both strength and diplomacy in a world where there's no shortage of the other extreme.

Professor Moriarty

Tell me how wrote: »

Merkel is pretty much out of the sphere of influence now already. She has already announced her departure date and successor. Recent health indicators may bring forward her stepping down.

Mores the pity. She understands better than anyone the purpose of the EU in promoting peace and cohesion. An example of someone with both strength and diplomacy in a world where there's no shortage of the other extreme.

Well, von der Leyen is a close ally of Merkel so no doubt Merkel will have influence over her. Plus Merkel, recent health issues aside, intends to stay in position until October 2021. But Brexit will be sorted by then, of course...

First Up

Professor Moriarty wrote:

Well, von der Leyen is a close ally of Merkel so no doubt Merkel will have influence over her. Plus Merkel, recent health issues aside, intends to stay in position until October 2021. But Brexit will be sorted by then, of course...

If Brexiteers are planning on Merkel being out of the picture during the next act in their pantomime, they are making yet another serious miscalculation. But what's new.....

Professor Moriarty

First Up wrote: »

If Brexiteers are planning on Merkel being out of the picture during the next act in their pantomime, they are making yet another serious miscalculation. But what's new.....

Even if she were to retire today, such is their close relationship, von der Leyen would continue to consult her on all important matters.

ancapailldorcha

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

Ah right! Well, your former mayor is about to get a chance to show his Churchillian qualities. Though I think Macron and Merkel would buy and sell him. Bluff and bluster really doesn't cut it when the adults start talking. And the thought of Johnson trying to intimidate Barnier or Verhofstadt, by table thumping and "full-throated" argument, is amusing.

He was never my Mayor. I've not been here long enough to have voted for any Mayor of London.

Johnson only has Churchillian qualities in his imagination. He can surround himself with sycophants all he wants but this won't change fantasy into reality.