Brexit discussion thread XII (Please read OP before posting)

Ben Done

Roanmore wrote: »

Interesting that either The Mail or The Express had the headline this morning "Don't smear Brexit", wonder if they have been given a preview.

Downing Street 'sources' no doubt.

They were also spinning furiously before the weekend, saying Corbyn was the beneficiary of Russian interference before the 2019 election (after he referenced documents posted on Reddit for weeks before)

Strazdas

Ben Done wrote: »

Interesting live event starting at 10:30 on Citizen TV YouTube channel..

Carole Cadwalladr (of Cambridge Analytica exposé fame)
Luke Harding (Russia correspondent - new book = Shadow State)
Bill Browser (of Magnitsky fame)
Catherine Belton (book = Putin"s people)

Discussing the Russia Report

(significance to Brexit: Aaron Banks, shady Brexit character (of empty diamond mines fame, among much else) is suiing to try to delay release of the Russia Report (after walking out of testifying to the Committee), as it might defame him..

https://m.youtube.com/channel/UC2FZVXZkfDencs6KsYVpe_g

He has absolutely zero chance of halting publication. "The report shows me up in a bad light" is not going to wash in any court room.

First Up

Alun wrote:

They've been open in Ballymun since the middle of June.

Yes, I should have said that.

Dave0301

The press conference on the Russian Report is not doing Boris & Co any favors right now.

Basically, they didn't bother to check if there was external interference into UK affairs, especially when they had priors for it. No wonder Boris pushed its publication back.

Enzokk

Dave0301 wrote: »

The press conference on the Russian Report is not doing Boris & Co any favors right now.

Basically, they didn't bother to check if there was external interference into UK affairs, especially when they had priors for it. No wonder Boris pushed its publication back.

You cannot find evidence of interference if you don't go looking for the evidence at all. Damning of Cameron, May and Johnson for not caring about interference at all. I also found interesting that one of the redacted part is to do with members of the House of Lords and their interests and involvement with Russian nationals it seems.

Also, complete abdication of duty of Johnson and members of his party, but then again this tweet explains why they didn't investigate that much. The influence may not have been giving money in a envelope with instructions on it, but by donating lots of money and getting one on one time and building a personal relationship they make it difficult to look deeply into said persons and why they are spending thousands to spend time with you.

https://twitter.com/CarolineLucas/status/1285515314197929984?s=20

As for the Brexit referendum, well they found no evidence of interference. This is not because there wasn't attempts, but because nobody took the time to look for any. So when No.10 comes out with Johnson not having seen evidence it is true, but because he is a useless leader and didn't care to find out. Neither did Cameron or May or any of the ministers that were in cabinet at that time.

Enzokk

No shock at all, Johnson is not interested to find out if a foreign country interfered in a UK election, I guess because he won and wouldn't be where he is if said interference didn't happen,

https://twitter.com/BenKentish/status/1285525347862290432?s=20

https://twitter.com/BenKentish/status/1285526470396436481?s=20

Leroy42

The emphasis will be on the ack of evidence in terms of the Brexit ref, which as has been pointed out seems more about not looking to any conclusion, but the report is a pretty damning indictment of the government and it is very clear why Johnson stopped the report before the election.

It is not influence, foreign parties are always going to try to gain influence, but that they seemingly did nothing about it. Cameron, May and Johnson all turned a blind eye to it. I assume it is a massive coincidence that Russian money was flowing into the Tory party.

This should really be a resigned matter for a PM, and both TM and Cameron should be hauled in front of the HoC to explain their non actions.
Of course none of that will happen, but it should.

Enzokk

In other EU news, it was pointed out that the Covid-19 recovery fund could be something that stretches EU unity. An agreement has been reached and much like all agreements with the EU, it is a bunch of compromises from both sides,

EU leaders seal deal on spending and €750bn Covid-19 recovery plans

EU leaders have reached a historic agreement on a €750bn coronavirus pandemic recovery fund and their long-term spending plans following days of acrimonious debate at the bloc’s longest summit in nearly two decades.

As the meeting reached its fifth day, the 27 exhausted heads of state and government finally gave their seal of approval to a plan for the EU to jointly borrow debt to be disbursed through grants on an unprecedented scale, in the face of an economic downturn not seen since the Great Depression.

As for the compromises, well this seems to sum it up,

Despite initial opposition from the so-called frugal states of the Netherlands, Austria, Sweden and Denmark, agreement was finally found, following a final 5.15am session of the 27 on Tuesday morning, to disburse vast sums in the form of non-repayable grants to countries most stricken by the coronavirus pandemic.

The breakthrough followed a new proposal from Michel for the EU to pay out €390bn in grants and €360bn in loans from the new economic reconstruction fund.

The “frugal” states had been pushing for the original proposal by the European commission for €500bn in grants to be reduced to €350bn, to the evident frustration of Macron and the German chancellor, Angela Merkel.

So a compromise, but countries would have expended capital to get what they want, much like we did in regards to Brexit to get concessions. You give some and take some, but this is what the EU is about, finding a compromise. I guess this is really only possible if both sides are interested in finding a deal though.

Leroy42

Back to Brexit, the HoC yesterday voted down an amendment which would have given, in part, the HoC a vote on future trade deals.

So after all the 'take back control' the MP's basically voted to exclude themselves (unless they are cabinet) from any involvement in the future trade of the UK.

Enzokk

Leroy42 wrote: »

Back to Brexit, the HoC yesterday voted down an amendment which would have given, in part, the HoC a vote on future trade deals.

So after all the 'take back control' the MP's basically voted to exclude themselves (unless they are cabinet) from any involvement in the future trade of the UK.

That is another joke from the likes of John Redwood. He used the fact that the UK parliament didn't have a say about trade deals the EU negotiates as a reason to leave the EU, but when given the chance to give the UK Parliament a say in trade deals the UK Government will negotiate he votes against it. We know it never really was about what they said it was, but to have it laid bare so openly is actually funny in a morbid way.

https://twitter.com/dc_lawrence/status/1285122037955141632?s=20

Dave0301

Leroy42 wrote: »

Back to Brexit, the HoC yesterday voted down an amendment which would have given, in part, the HoC a vote on future trade deals.

So after all the 'take back control' the MP's basically voted to exclude themselves (unless they are cabinet) from any involvement in the future trade of the UK.

They also voted against a proposal to protect the NHS in future trade deals.

https://twitter.com/HouseofCommons/status/1285314836386242565

Two different conclusions drawn from the Russia report here:

Guy Verhofstadt, chief Brexit negotiator for the European Parliament, says: "Brexit was always a gift to Putin because it weakened the EU and left Britain divided, isolated - the Russia Report shows just how many questions remain unanswered."

While Brexit Party leader Nigel Farage says: "Years of lies and smears from Remain politicians and much of our media. There is no evidence of Russian involvement with Leave.EU or me in the referendum. It was all a hoax - apologies are now required."

The most frustrating aspect of the current Tory administration is their seemingly total lack of accountability for anything. They will attempt to shrug off the findings of the Russian Report which is fairly damming of their duty of care to internal UK affairs, and proceed to crash headfirst into a situation that will benefit the rich (i.e. most of them and their chums) and result in the majority suffering as a result.

Tell me how

Leroy42 wrote: »

Back to Brexit, the HoC yesterday voted down an amendment which would have given, in part, the HoC a vote on future trade deals.

So after all the 'take back control' the MP's basically voted to exclude themselves (unless they are cabinet) from any involvement in the future trade of the UK.

Bookmarking this for a future Tory opposition expressing outrage that they are not being allowed to vote on a Labour negotiated deal, while ignoring the fact that they voted for it to be this way.

Enzokk

This is just a follow up to the posts about parliament voting against them having a say in future trade deals,

https://twitter.com/StevePeers/status/1285349623444525063?s=20


An interesting comment on the tweet, maybe because they didn't have a say in FTA that the EU negotiates, why bother with it now? Well then they should come out and say that the EU got this right, but I doubt that is the argument he wants to make.

I also suspect if Labour were in charge he would be spitting mad about not getting a say in the trade deals they would negotiate.

Zubeneschamali

Enzokk wrote: »

An interesting comment on the tweet, maybe because they didn't have a say in FTA that the EU negotiates, why bother with it

It's worse than that - the UK did have a veto on EU trade deals, the only reason Parliament didn't get a vote was tha UK law said the Government had the veto, not Parliament but Parliament could have passed a UK law giving themselves a vote.

Remember when the Walloon parliament rejected the Canada deal?

An Ciarraioch

Remember the easiest trade deal in history?

https://twitter.com/hendopolis/status/1285679660932706306

An Ciarraioch

Not to mention

https://twitter.com/PickardJE/status/1285822183336488960

Enzokk

An Ciarraioch wrote: »

Remember the easiest trade deal in history?

https://twitter.com/hendopolis/status/1285679660932706306

With the people in charge of the UK right now it is not a surprise if this happens. I thought there was a competition of worse PM in history between May and Cameron with Cameron edging it because he did the referendum when there was no need. But surely May is now second? Johnson will be the worst PM ever, no doubt, but May did nothing about Russia interference and she thought it was a good idea to make Johnson Foreign Secretary and then managed to lose seats to Jeremy Corbyn.

The reason why Johnson is the worst,

Thread of the utter useless week of this government

Some of the highlights of those Johnson thinks should be in charge of running the country,

24. And now corruption news, and we’ll start small: Robert Jenrick, who you might remember from previous episodes, was in charge of £25m regeneration scheme

25. 60 of the 61 constituencies helped were Tory seats with small majorities, or Tory targets at the general election

26. Only 2 towns had Tory majorities over 10,000. One was Jenrick’s own seat

The UK is heading in a dark direction if they allow Cummings and Johnson to steer it where they are.

Leroy42

Sothe UK look like they will have no major trade deals by the time the transition period ends.

At that point there would have been 4.5 years since the vote, during which time they have achieved nothing. The transition period, which the UK decided not to extend but was originally asked for by the UK, was meant to allow time between leaving the EU and the implementation of the new deals, standards and controls.

They will not have the border controls ready, they have no trade deals worth talking about, and they haven't even been able to come up with a plan for standards.

Whether one agrees with Brexit, or even if one doesn't but believes that since the vote it has to be followed through, there is no excuse for the government to have achieved nothing or note in the last 4.5 years.

And lest anyone forget, the UK had the option to extend the transition period for up to two years to give anyone the time to get all these things sorted out. They chose not to.

Quin_Dub

Leroy42 wrote: »

Sothe UK look like they will have no major trade deals by the time the transition period ends.

At that point there would have been 4.5 years since the vote, during which time they have achieved nothing. The transition period, which the UK decided not to extend but was originally asked for by the UK, was meant to allow time between leaving the EU and the implementation of the new deals, standards and controls.

They will not have the border controls ready, they have no trade deals worth talking about, and they haven't even been able to come up with a plan for standards.

Whether one agrees with Brexit, or even if one doesn't but believes that since the vote it has to be followed through, there is no excuse for the government to have achieved nothing or note in the last 4.5 years.

And lest anyone forget, the UK had the option to extend the transition period for up to two years to give anyone the time to get all these things sorted out. They chose not to.

Absolutely - The utter incompetence of all involved on the UK side has been staggering.

As you say , they've had 4 years to come up with plans to address the issues and have failed miserably.

AlmightyCushion

Leroy42 wrote: »

Sothe UK look like they will have no major trade deals by the time the transition period ends.

At that point there would have been 4.5 years since the vote, during which time they have achieved nothing. The transition period, which the UK decided not to extend but was originally asked for by the UK, was meant to allow time between leaving the EU and the implementation of the new deals, standards and controls.

They will not have the border controls ready, they have no trade deals worth talking about, and they haven't even been able to come up with a plan for standards.

Whether one agrees with Brexit, or even if one doesn't but believes that since the vote it has to be followed through, there is no excuse for the government to have achieved nothing or note in the last 4.5 years.

And lest anyone forget, the UK had the option to extend the transition period for up to two years to give anyone the time to get all these things sorted out. They chose not to.

Achieved nothing? They have achieved so many things. Such as blue passports and.. eh.. you know, all those other things.

Shelga

What is going to happen to the likes of Jaguar Land Rover from January 1st? If there is no trade deal with the EU, then they have to apply 10% tariffs to all vehicles leaving UK shores to sell to the EU, from that date? As well as facing huge delays for all parts coming in to the UK?

It is utter insanity. How long can such a company continue manufacturing in that environment, and what will the ramifications be? What will the CEO be thinking right now in terms of contingency planning?- because surely their business will quickly no longer be profitable in such conditions, especially one that recorded a £422m loss in the last year.

Leroy42

The amazing thing is that the government have no answers to those sort of questions. Nothing. THey have given no policy, no outline. They have continually stated the need for finality to give business confidence, without being able to offer one idea of how they will deal with any scenario.

Peter Foster of Financial Times yesterday tweeted out the situation with regard to standards, and the mess it is. The UK now want their own standards, but haven't explained how it will work, what the standards will be, what will happen in regards to products with the EU standards, will the UKGA standard be accepted anywhere else, who is going to decide on the standards. Nothing.

So they are racing towards the exit without any clue of what they are heading into to, offering nothing to help all those they are demanding follow them. What is the policy in regards to health insurance for foreign travel? Will insurers be obliged to offer insurance, is there a maximum price? What about pre-existing conditions?

Nothing. The best you get out of anyone is that Brexit is going to happen, must happen, and many opportunities will exist (which is another way of saying that anyone facing difficulties simply failed to take advantage of these unknown opportunities.)

Sam Russell

AlmightyCushion wrote: »

Achieved nothing? They have achieved so many things. Such as blue passports and.. eh.. you know, all those other things.

You should not forget the Faroe Islands trade deal that allows the Faroe fish (caught in British waters) free access to the UK market, but no access the other way - hugely significant, but I cannot remember why.

listermint

Leroy42 wrote: »

The amazing thing is that the government have no answers to those sort of questions. Nothing. THey have given no policy, no outline. They have continually stated the need for finality to give business confidence, without being able to offer one idea of how they will deal with any scenario.

Peter Foster of Financial Times yesterday tweeted out the situation with regard to standards, and the mess it is. The UK now want their own standards, but haven't explained how it will work, what the standards will be, what will happen in regards to products with the EU standards, will the UKGA standard be accepted anywhere else, who is going to decide on the standards. Nothing.

So they are racing towards the exit without any clue of what they are heading into to, offering nothing to help all those they are demanding follow them. What is the policy in regards to health insurance for foreign travel? Will insurers be obliged to offer insurance, is there a maximum price? What about pre-existing conditions?

Nothing. The best you get out of anyone is that Brexit is going to happen, must happen, and many opportunities will exist (which is another way of saying that anyone facing difficulties simply failed to take advantage of these unknown opportunities.)

Its not difficult.


They are waiting on the EU to bail them out. Thats it, thats the strategy.

Leroy42

listermint wrote: »

Its not difficult.


They are waiting on the EU to bail them out. Thats it, thats the strategy.

But if that were true, they would also need to have some plan if it doesn't happen?

Regardless of any bailout by the EU (by which I assume you mean that the EU will cave into their demands), the UK will still be faced with massive issues. They have already started, belatedly, on erecting border areas and truck parks. There is the added costs of customs paperwork.

The is the issue of country of origin, professional qualifications, product standards. There appears to be little, if any, plans in place for any of this.

listermint

Leroy42 wrote: »

But if that were true, they would also need to have some plan if it doesn't happen?

Regardless of any bailout by the EU (by which I assume you mean that the EU will cave into their demands), the UK will still be faced with massive issues. They have already started, belatedly, on erecting border areas and truck parks. There is the added costs of customs paperwork.

The is the issue of country of origin, professional qualifications, product standards. There appears to be little, if any, plans in place for any of this.

They want the EU to bail them out in the areas of importance and muddle their way through the rest of it.

I wouldnt put to much credence into any master strategy. Often the simplest explanations are the reality.

You only have to examine the calibre of individual you are dealing with. Most of the MPs are no more skilled than a 2 bit local councillor.

ancapailldorcha

It looks like the US trade deal that was unlikely to happen by year's end is not happening:

Financial Times wrote:

The UK government has abandoned hopes of reaching a trade deal with America ahead of the US presidential election in November, with British officials blaming the Covid-19 pandemic for slow progress.

Prime Minister Boris Johnson and international trade secretary Liz Truss had hoped to conclude a fast-track agreement by late summer, which would be hailed as an early win from leaving the EU. For the past 40 years the UK has not had any bilateral trade deals because all trade policies for EU member states are conducted through Brussels.

But senior government figures have concluded that no comprehensive deal is possible before the November US poll as the two sides grapple over contentious issues such as whether to allow US agricultural products into the UK market.

A third round of talks will begin via online video conference on Monday but neither side expects a conclusive breakthrough.

https://www.ft.com/content/383f174e-baa4-49c5-86c3-d2b5f6453fd4

Despite the dismal projections for the benefits of such a deal to the UK, it won't even get those by the look of things.

johnnyskeleton

I heard an interesting theory in passing so in truth I cant say if it comes from a reliable source or not, but the suggestion is that the Russians had hoped that Brexit would distract and divide the UK and the EU but had never intended for it to:
A) pass referendum;
be approved by parliament;
C) run aground in neogitations; and
D) gain popular and media support for this dramatic no deal Brexit.

We like to think of it as being a victory for Russia, but there is a sense that Russia has overplayed its hand. Now the EU is stronger than ever and the UK is begging to become a vassal state of the US. Russias hope was to have a fractured weak Europe, and while that seemed to be the case immediately after the referendum, its gone too far the other way from the Russian point of view.

Ive also been wondering about Europes role in the future. I think they need to ease up on the idea that the EU will be a world leader in human rights, democracy and the rule of law and instead spend some time relecting on our own problems.

I heard an interesting analysis from some African Americans who quite accurately pointed out the hypocracy of Europeans claiming the moral high ground on things like racism - if a banana were thrown at a black athele in the States, it woulf be major national and international news; in Europe it happens far more often than we care to admit, and from this we can extrapolate that Europe really isnt as advanced on the equality/human rights front as we would like to believe.

So ultimately Im actually very grateful for this no deal Brexit. We have been reflexively pro EU for the last 4 years, now maybe we can start to be a bit more self relfective and critical.

And yes, maybe the upshot will be renewed relations with Russia and completion of nord stream 2 type projects

Shelga

So if they agree some bare bones deal that's little better than a no-deal, what does that mean? I've heard it'll stop the worst immediate impacts of no deal on farmers, but beyond that? What might it mean for manufacturing and services?

It's actually quite hard to find a single, easy-to-understand explanation of all of this!

PeadarCo

Shelga wrote: »

So if they agree some bare bones deal that's little better than a no-deal, what does that mean? I've heard it'll stop the worst immediate impacts of no deal on farmers, but beyond that? What might it mean for manufacturing and services?

It's actually quite hard to find a single, easy-to-understand explanation of all of this!

If the UK leaves with no deal they become a 3rd country for trading purposes. The easiest thing to do is look up the requirements for dealing and selling to a company in a country that has no trade deal with the EU. So if you have any dealing with UK organisations prepare for a massive increase in paperwork.