Brexit discussion thread X (Please read OP before posting)

Joe_ Public

Enzokk wrote: »

How? The deal will need to be future proofed if a different government comes in and changes the FTA they want. Let's say Labour negotiates with a customs union as one of the pillars of the future deal. How does the EU ensure that a future non-Labour government doesn't change this?

What does the backstop do? It ensures there will not be a border between us and NI. What would the EU want guaranteed even if Labour indicates it wants a Norway style Brexit? The border, and how do you do that? The backstop as in the WA. So the only thing that will change is where the border is, like in the backstop as now or in the Irish Sea. The backstop will stay, the language may be softened somehow but it will need to be in there, no matter who is negotiating it.

The reason it became a problem is because of May's red lines. Let's imagine Corbyn won a majority in 2017 and he sent Labour to negotiate. The backstop may have been the Irish Sea border, with the message that there are already checks between the UK and NI and the FTA will ensure this backstop never comes into force so there will be no regulatory difference between NI and the rest of the UK.

So for me the only difference between the deals that May or Corbyn could have gotten is the numbers in parliament to get it through. The deal is the deal the UK will get, hard Brexit or super soft Brexit. This is it, the Political Declaration would have been different but as we know it is only an aspiration of the future deal and not the deal itself.

So in my opinion Labour is incorrect to think they will get a different deal, they will get the same one with a different political declaration. If parliament doesn't ratify it then it has to go for a vote in a referendum, and seeing as parliament has already rejected it three times then the only option open is a referendum on the deal.

I think the EU would certainly be willing to work with a Labour delegation on the basis that it is in everybodys interest to work out a bill that can get through parliament. Labours biggest problem wasnt necessarily the text of the WA itself, but with the fact they would then be handing over total control of the future relationship process to the tories with no safety mechanisms and their only hope to subsequently win an election. Nor do i see how you can put the same WAB to a referendum that isn't binding and then has to go back to a parliament that has rejected it 3 times. I would be fairly confident the EU would view that situation with enough flexibility as is required. Maybe not substantial changes, but enough to satisfy both sides and give it every chance of getting through.

PropJoe10

An Ciarraioch wrote: »

Depends on which opinion poll you pick, but most recent one gives the Tories a ten-point lead:

https://twitter.com/britainelects/status/1170389619449454593

Remarkable really, considering the person currently at the helm. I think a lot of that comes from pure Brexit fatigue rather than any sort of coherent opinion on how best to proceed.

Zubeneschamali

PropJoe10 wrote: »

Remarkable really, considering the person currently at the helm.

I don't think it is remarkable. 52% voted to leave, and the parties are finally (3 years later) sorting into Brexit/Tory party for Leave at all costs, everyone else for Remain (or at least allow folks to vote again to Remain).


Whatever you may think about how utterly and pathetically useless Boris has been, he has been making all the right noises to attract Brexit voters.

Capt'n Midnight

ThePanjandrum wrote: »

No, that wouldn't work. Northern Ireland would then be subject to EU law though part of the UK so Uk legislation which was in the EU competency would then cause a clash between EU and UK law.

The way around this would be for Northern Ireland to become part of Ireland which might lead to violence and bombings within the Republic which Ireland would have to try to put down whilst at the same time it was making large payments to the North which would be a lot higher than they are now because the North sends more goods to the rest of the UK than to anywhere else.

It's been explained to you multiple times that NI uses very different laws to the rest of the UK. So not an issue.

Just like Scotland really.



Oddly enough our written constitution guarantees Loyalists marchers rights enjoyed in the UK but not in NI.

And the economics have been done to death.

London won't be able to subsidise the rest of the UK if the financial sector shrinks.

Strazdas

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

I don't think it is remarkable. 52% voted to leave, and the parties are finally (3 years later) sorting into Brexit/Tory party for Leave at all costs, everyone else for Remain (or at least allow folks to vote again to Remain).


Whatever you may think about how utterly and pathetically useless Boris has been, he has been making all the right noises to attract Brexit voters.

Certainly, but that makes him a deeply polarising PM, a disaster in fact. Telling the hard Brexiteers what they want to hear and promising them everything means he is totally alienating everyone else in the country.

You couldn't think of a worse figure to be in charge.

Capt'n Midnight

Enzokk wrote: »

Which election was that? I can only see the 2010 GE where Farage stood against Bercow and unless John Stevens is a dolphin, I cannot find where he did badly? I mean he did receive 17.4% of the vote in that election and John Stevens was a Conservative MEP for a long time, so its not like he lost to the Monster Raving Looney Party.

It was over MP's flipping their official residence for the second homes allowance.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-1265532/ANDREW-PIERCE-The-stories-spin-doctors-DONT-want-read.html

It shouldn't need to be said but in FPTP 17.4% isn't even in the also ran category.

16.4% of the national vote got 2 MP's in 2015 one each for UKIP and the Green

As for the UK codifying its constitution, David Allen Green, constitutional lawyer and columnist for FT who seems very clued up about the matters in the UK right now, warned that writing the constitution down may solve some problems but it would create others as well. Take the US as an example, a written constitution is no guarantee that a populist leader will not wipe his behind with it.

At the very least they need to say which documents are kosher and in what order.
Magna Carta to Erskine May

Kermit.de.frog

This looks like a kite being flown in the Telegraph - calling for Boris to introduce more Irish Sea checks.

I can't read the full thing (paywalled) - but when kites are flown in strategic publications it normally means something is on the boil.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2019/09/07/boris-can-break-eu-customs-deadlock-flipping-mays-irish-weakness/

The best way to break the deadlock would be to offer to carry out additional customs checks at the Irish Sea instead of at the border between Northern Ireland and Ireland.

sondagefaux

McGiver wrote: »

World gdp:
USA 24%
China 15%
EU 13%
Japan 5%
India 3%
UK 3%
The rest 37%

As the developing world grows the developed countries' share of the world's GDP will decrease. Again, this is not a rocket science. Developed countries grow less, developing countries grow faster (from lower base).

The key point which alludes the Brexiter lunatics is this:
1. The UK's share of world gdp decreases too

2. UK in the EU having the same share of world gdp as China or 75% of that of the USA is much better than UK out of EU having only 20% of China gdp or 12% of USA gdp.

The 'growing faster' trope is nonsense.

If per capita GDP in France is $50,000 per year, and is growing at 1.0% per year, next year it will be $50,500.

If per capita GDP in Ethiopia is $1,500 per year and is growing at 10% per year, next year it will be $1,650.

Even if Ethiopia were to sustain a 10% growth rate for many years, it would take decades for it to catch up with France, even if French growth rates remained at only 1% for many years.

BorneTobyWilde

There was a time when two groups entered a room and did not leave it until they had an agreement, nowadays it's all twitter messages and sound bytes .
UK and EU should have showdown talks, and thrash a deal out, each need to give a bit. UK needs to be free to do it's own trade deals, but also have a deal with EU in place.
N.I can't be sorted. Build the dam border and be done with it, or allow N.I who voted to remain to remain, and **** the DUP.

N.I need to be separated from rest of UK on paper only.

sondagefaux

Capt'n Midnight wrote: »

Parliament have already had Meaningful Votes on most of the options. And rejected them.

So we even know how to rank them.

Majority Motion
6 Customs union
27 Referendum on the Withdrawal Agreement
70 Labour alternative
94 "Common Market 2.0"
109 Revocation to avoid No Deal
240 No Deal
283 "Managed No Deal"
313 EFTA membership


LOL

The words leave and remain were chosen to get a leave vote
The Brexit party logo was an arrow pointing to their box at the top of the ballot paper.

I can guarantee Leave will mount legal challenges against whatever form of wording is used

If Parliament sets out the wording in an Act of Parliament, there can be no legal challenges.

If the Brexit Party is convinced a majority of UK voters want No Deal Brexit, let them put that option to the people in a referendum:

No Deal v SM for all UK, with added CU for Northern Ireland.

No Deal would be trounced.

Joe_ Public

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

I don't think it is remarkable. 52% voted to leave, and the parties are finally (3 years later) sorting into Brexit/Tory party for Leave at all costs, everyone else for Remain (or at least allow folks to vote again to Remain).


Whatever you may think about how utterly and pathetically useless Boris has been, he has been making all the right noises to attract Brexit voters.

Given there were 400 or so leave voting constituencies in the 2016 vote it seems a sound enough strategy on the surface, but problem with it is it puts a premium on Johnson mopping up the vast majority of that brexit vote as he will be potentially alienating the 40% of conservatives who voted to remain and would have been appalled by some of the shenanigans they witnessed in the Commons last week. Time will tell, but i suspect without making some kind of arrangement with farage - which is anathema to him - he will struggle to even get near a majority.

listermint

I can see that 400 odd voting leave constituencies falling dramatically. They didn't even know what leave meant and j refuse to believe they did. That's nonsense peddled by brexitukip

sondagefaux

Forty Seven wrote: »

Nonsense like this just feeds the leavers. The UK is a global power and will remain so. Permanent UN security council member, nuclear power, financial powerhouse, major tourist destination and cultural behemoth.
This type of belligerent schadenfreude is just uncalled for and does not help anyone.

A nuclear power that needs permission from the USA to launch missiles?

A financial behemoth? The City of London is a global financial centre because of the UK's membership of the EU.

Major tourist destination? So is Thailand, so is Greece. I presume they're major world powers?

Cultural behemoth? For how much longer?

Venice is now essentially a very large museum. It was once the capital of Europe's largest trading state.

Rome is no longer the most important urban centre for Europe, North Africa and the Middle East.

Nothing is certain in this world apart from change and death.

A Shropshire Lad

Sammy Wilsons face is getting even redder in the last few days. Must be something up

sondagefaux

Forty Seven wrote: »

I too share concerns over the rise of nationalism. I made a post about it a few pages back.

Imperialism however is history. The empire is history.

Which empire? I'm pretty sure that Wales was incorporated into England as a result of military conquest, Ireland came under English, later British, rule in similar fashion, that Northern Ireland's creation came about because of colonial settlement, and that Scotland's incorporation into the British state was partly as a result of a failed imperial venture.

The empire isn't history, it still exists. It's called the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland but essentially that state is an imperial construct, largely created and sustained by English imperialism and domination of its immediate neighbours.

LiamoSail

PropJoe10 wrote: »

Remarkable really, considering the person currently at the helm. I think a lot of that comes from pure Brexit fatigue rather than any sort of coherent opinion on how best to proceed.

Given 52% were racist/foolish enough to vote for Brexit, it’s hardly surprising that a racist fool’s party can command such apparent support.

sondagefaux

ThePanjandrum wrote: »

in European Elections a UK vote counts less than that of any other nation.

The EU uses a system called degressive proportionality to allocate MEPs to its member states.

Basically, the larger the population, the less MEPs a country has per head of population.

The system is designed to ensure that member states with smaller populations have a greater say in the European Parliament to balance their smaller voting weight in the Council.

Germany has by far the largest population of any EU member state, so it has fewer MEPs per head of population than any other EU nation, including the UK.

Seth Brundle

A Shropshire Lad wrote: »

Sammy Wilsons face is getting even redder in the last few days. Must be something up

His DUP buddy Jeffrey Donaldson reckons the UK will agree to some form of deal before leaving (note: there is only one deal on offer, which his party opposes!)

He also told the Kennedy Summer School that

a future solution for the Republic would be to join the Commonwealth.

Erm, okay. So which politician wants to end their career and demand that this question be put that to the people of the Republic?
https://www.irishtimes.com/news/ireland/irish-news/dup-mp-jeffrey-donaldson-says-uk-not-to-exit-eu-without-deal-1.4011376

ElectronVolt

He does realise the Commonwealth is just a purely symbolic organisation, without any trade role or legal powers, right?
Then again the DUP do tend to get caught up with symbols of identity and very little else.

sondagefaux

This bodes well.

New research by the British Chambers of Commerce (BCC) shows 41% of UK firms have done no risk assessment on the impact of Brexit.

The BCC survey canvassed the views of more than 1,500 business leaders.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-49605461

bilston

Amber Rudd just found her spine which she had recently lost.

sondagefaux

Forty Seven wrote: »

To be fair you will hardly going to get a report saying he was welcomed in Wakefield from the Guardian. The guy shouting at him has a strong Irish accent so can we really take this at face value? Wakefield voted strongly for leave. 66.3% in favour. The Guardian is incredibly biased.

Voting Leave =/= voting Tory.

Harry Palmr

Amber Rudd has jumped.

Kermit.de.frog

Brexit hard man Steve Barclay has written an Op ed for the Telegraph tomorrow.

It's pay walled. Anyone have the gist of it?

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2019/09/07/eu-setting-test-impossible-meet/

Headshot

sondagefaux wrote: »

This bodes well.



https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-49605461

I always find it funny when Sky News do interviews in towns that voted to leave the EU but rely on tourism to survive.

What goes through peoples head ill never understand.

There's a reason why the wealthy and the Conservatives want Brexit and it's not to help the man on the street, it's to line their pockets and benefactors with more money

Tell me how

bilston wrote: »

Amber Rudd just found her spine which she had recently lost.

Harry Palmr wrote: »

Amber Rudd has jumped.

https://twitter.com/AmberRuddHR/status/1170429481879842817

Nody

sondagefaux wrote: »

This bodes well.



https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-49605461

I honestly think a lot of this is down to people not realizing how interconnected service chains are today. Sure, your company don't import stuff from the continent but your supplier or your supplier's supplier may and that will suddenly throw a wrench into things not expected. And trying to switch supplier is likely to show all suppliers have a similar issue because once again they are importing for a reason and not for the funzies.

bilston

Harry Palmr wrote: »

Amber Rudd has jumped.

Resigned from the cabinet and according to Twitter has resigned the Tory whip as well.

listermint

The twitter bots are all over the Rudd thing too. Who funds this stuff. It's an awful shame twitter isn't being investigated for pumping multiple accounts spamming big announcements.

Headshot

Tell me how wrote: »

https://twitter.com/AmberRuddHR/status/1170429481879842817

She let herself and values down big time to even go into government with BJ in the first place and now the rats are escaping a sinking ship

I use to have a good bit of time for her but she has let herself down big time