Brexit discussion thread II

Jaggo · 05-09-2017 09:20PM

Just on the Free trade agreements, the UK's position is really poor.

On the copy and paste FTA, you will have 40 countries that have 2 years to review the impact of the FTA and come up with modifications that can alter the terms of trade verses the Uk in their own favour.
Each country will have three pieces of leverage in that the UK will need these FTAs, the UK will have little time to review each deal and the UK will not have their standards agencies up and running.

Obviously the 2 key countries that the UK will need to agree FTAs are with China and the USA - but there are issues with both.

The trade body, the Confederation of British Industry have warned against signing a FTA with the USA too early as they say the British trade team will be vastly inexperienced. http://news.sky.com/story/pm-warned-against-rushing-into-free-trade-deal-with-trumps-us-10942698, they also point out the amount of 'control' that will be giving away. It would seem rather silly to 'take back control' from a place where you had political and judicial oversight and then give it away in a deal where you have none. The CBI did recommend that the UK focuses on replicating some of the 38 trade agreements that the EU has with the USA.

On China things look worse. China has 15 FTAs- http://fta.mofcom.gov.cn/english/ (the ministry of finance in China). But you can see from the list of FTA, neither economics nor trade is the motivation for trade deals.

Australia;
New Zealand,
Iceland;
Switzerland;
Chile;
Georgia;
Korea;
Peru;
Costa Rica;
Singapore;
Pakistan;
ASEAN (times 2)
Hong Kong;
Macao.

A very short list, focused on commodities and political influence (Pakistan due to the number of wars with india; Georgia deal signed as part of the silk road project linking China -EU; Iceland regarding access to Arctic talks; Macao and Hong Kong, well China own these). The Swiss deal, the one offering most hope to the Brexit faithful, does not deal with either services nor finances.

All in all, very depressing. I think we can chalk up another 'lie' to the Leave side.

murphaph · 05-09-2017 09:42PM

Yikes. That Chinese FTA list is short and sweet

blanch152 · 05-09-2017 10:08PM

LeinsterDub wrote: »

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2017/sep/05/leaked-document-reveals-uk-brexit-plan-to-deter-eu-immigrants

At this point is there any point in continuing negotiations. We've had no progress on any of the 3 core issues.

Wow, just wow.

At least it should be cheaper to buy property in the Canaries and the south of Spain when all the Brits are thrown out.

Water John · 05-09-2017 10:17PM

Well a good few of those retirees abroad, actually voted for Brexit.
Talk about turkeys voting for Christmas.
A long winter in Sunderland, might cure them.

listermint · 05-09-2017 10:37PM

blanch152 wrote: »

Wow, just wow.

At least it should be cheaper to buy property in the Canaries and the south of Spain when all the Brits are thrown out.

916,000 Polish nationals live in the UK, more than the total number of British nationals living in the EU
....

This part of the article appears to be not factual.

There is estimated to be over 1.2 million British citizens living in EU countries.

steddyeddy · 05-09-2017 10:51PM

Tory voters must be kicking themselves now. Nationalism can be very self destructive.

breatheme · 06-09-2017 12:53AM

LeinsterDub wrote: »

It is also likely to enrage many in Europe who will feel the UK is intending to treat EU nationals as second-class citizens and could invite retaliatory action by the 27-country bloc.

At this point is there any point in continuing negotiations. We've had no progress on any of the 3 core issues.

Wait. So, according to this and the Irish position paper:
- The UK want to retain the CTA and the open border between RoI & NI.
- The UK want EU nationals to enter on their passports.
- EU citizens can enter Ireland with their identity card, and then go on to NI without their passport.
So, what gives? These things are mutually exclusive.

Rain Ascending · 06-09-2017 01:31AM

I believe we have seen enough over the last couple of months to predict the outcome of a successful negotiation for the Brexit divorce talks:

Both sides will agree to a figure for the so-called divorce bill. The tricky bit here is the politics of it in the UK, where explaining the need for any payment will be difficult. However it will be helped by the next point.
There will be some transitional arrangement that lasts up to the end of the current EU budget cycle, for which the UK seems to have some financial obligations anyway. The nature of the transition will depend on who is in government in the UK: possibly membership of the single market if it's Labour, possibly just the customs union if it's the Conservatives under May.
An agreement will be reached on EU nationals already in the UK and on UK nationals in the EU.
There will be a successful negotiation on the Common Travel Area, but not on cross-boarder trade. There will be some agreed financial support for the Republic (from the EU) and the North (from the UK) to offset the resulting damage.

The post-Brexit trade position will depend again on who is in government in the UK: perhaps as part of the customs union if it's Labour or aiming for a free-trade agreement if it's the Conservatives under May. Any free-trade agreement negotiation will be a multi-year affair.

Risks:
- One or other side, or both, get hung up on the issue of legal adjudication for EU and UK citizens on the "wrong" side of the border.
- The UK political system grinds to a halt due to May's weak position.

The basic reason why it's possible to narrow down to a range of probable outcomes is, in my belief, the simplicity of the EU position: get the divorce terms sorted and then wait for the UK to select one of a number of existing models: single market membership as per Norway, customs union membership as per Turkey, or a free-trade agreement as per the Ukraine, but (just like most such agreements) customized for the specifics of the UK situation. I don't believe that there is much appetite within the EU-27 for designing a new model just for the UK -- the risks for EU cohesion are much too high.

robindch · 06-09-2017 01:32AM

First Up wrote: »

I know the point you are making but a trade "deal" is not about either side agreeing to buy specific amounts of specific products from each other. It is about setting the terms under which buyers, sellers and intermediaries can do business. [...] There may be quotas applied but they will be for maximum, not minimum amounts. Trade is a private sector activity and is conducted on a commercial/competitive basis. Nobody in any country is obliged to buy anything from anyone in another.

You're quite correct, of course.

However, in economic terms, a tariff break point isn't all that dissimilar to a sales target, so I hope you don't mind me simplifying the punchline by inverting the economic sense of it, in the hope that any of the current crop of cabinet members reading this thread might get the gag.

Thanks!

robindch · 06-09-2017 01:40AM

steddyeddy wrote: »

Tory voters must be kicking themselves now.

I wouldn't have thought so - the majority of Tory voters (if not MP's) seem happy enough to do anything so long as it annoys Johnny Foreigner, even if it costs jobs within their family.

steddyeddy wrote: »

Nationalism can be very self destructive.

Nationalism is now mainstream Tory policy, so one can only stand, at a distance, back and admire the cheeky nature of the creek up which the the current administration is paddling for its own amusement.

Capt'n Midnight · 06-09-2017 01:40AM

jm08 wrote: »

Also, worth noting that Germany exports 1 out of 7 cars manufactured to the UK (which suggests 6 out of 7 are imported elsewhere such as EU 26, Japan, China, etc.)

Also worth noting UK car sales are down. A lot of the big brands are doing scrapage deals, which means less profit even if cars are shifted.

Already the UK isn't worth as much to the Germans.

UK car sales fall for fifth month in a row
NI car sales fall 9% in August says motor trade body

Rise in personal loans dangerous, Bank of England official says

UK household debt now a record £13,000, says TUC - from January but with the real fall in wages I don't think it's gotten better

Rain Ascending · 06-09-2017 01:44AM

breatheme wrote: »

Wait. So, according to this and the Irish position paper:
- The UK want to retain the CTA and the open border between RoI & NI.
- The UK want EU nationals to enter on their passports.
- EU citizens can enter Ireland with their identity card, and then go on to NI without their passport.
So, what gives? These things are mutually exclusive.

My understanding is that this ambiguity already exists today ... for non-EU nationals with residency or visitor permits for the Republic of Ireland. They can enter and leave Ireland, as allowed by the conditions of their permit, but don't have any rights to enter the territory of the UK.

Brexit "just" extends this ambiguity to non-Irish EU citizens.

This is why I suspect that agreement on the post-Brexit CTA is feasible.

Capt'n Midnight · 06-09-2017 01:46AM

Those on the bottom rungs won't be able to take another round of austerity. But they won't be able to do anything about it until the next election, which will be after Brexit

Banks warned on ballooning consumer borrowing

at present, real incomes are falling as inflation approaches 3%.
...
If you exclude mortgages, consumers are now borrowing 10% more than they were last year.

Peregrinus · 06-09-2017 02:29AM

Rain Ascending wrote: »

My understanding is that this ambiguity already exists today ... for non-EU nationals with residency or visitor permits for the Republic of Ireland. They can enter and leave Ireland, as allowed by the conditions of their permit, but don't have any rights to enter the territory of the UK.

Brexit "just" extends this ambiguity to non-Irish EU citizens.

This is why I suspect that agreement on the post-Brexit CTA is feasible.

It's a matter of scale.

The CTA works because Ireland and the UK keep their immigration policies more-or-less aligned. The number of third-country nationals who have a right to enter Ireland, but no right to enter the UK and no prospect of obtaining one, is very small, so the "leakage" of such people into the UK via Ireland is acceptable. (And vice versa for people entering Ireland from the UK.)

But if the object of Brexit includes "taking back control" of EU immigration, that analysis breaks down completely. There is no prospect whatsoever that Ireland and the UK can align their immigration policies with respect to EU citizens, and Ireland is highly accessible to any EU citizen wishing to enter the UK.

robindch · 06-09-2017 02:30AM

breatheme wrote: »

- The UK want to retain the CTA and the open border between RoI & NI.
- The UK want EU nationals to enter on their passports.
- EU citizens can enter Ireland with their identity card, and then go on to NI without their passport.
So, what gives? These things are mutually exclusive.

They're not exclusive if a) Northern Ireland agrees that it can admit EU passport holders from the Republic, and b) there's a passport check between NI and the mainland UK, in order to block out the same EU passport holders.

That will, of course, annoy the DUP who maintain that NI and mainland UK are inalienable parts of the Queen's United Kingdom and should, therefore, not have any border control between them.

As with the Tory's and Labour, the DUP may not have thought through their pro-Brexit policy follow-through all that carefully.

Peregrinus · 06-09-2017 05:16AM

solodeogloria wrote: »

Good afternoon!

The inability to sign free trade deals prevents Britain from liberalising trade terms. Brexit permits signing free trade deals. More liberal trade terms provide more opportunities for exporting goods. This is the reason why I believe good free trade agreements will expand export opportunities both to the US and to China.

These two countries make up £100bn in trade together at present. This could be increased significantly given better trade terms.

Much thanks,
solodeogloria

murphaph wrote: »

How much does Germany export to those two countries under the awful EU I wonder?

The EU is China's largest trade partner (and this will still be true after the UK leaves). The EU is also the US's large trade partner.

Germany alone is a much larger trade partner for both China and the US than the UK is. The Netherlands is also a larger trade partner for China than the UK is I(though not for the US).

While there is obviously scope for the UK to increase its trade with both countries "given better trade terms", there seems no reason to think that the UK is likely to be given better trade terms when ploughing its own furrow than it might hope to get if it remained a part of the EU. On the face of it, the idea seems a bit fanciful.

Enzokk · 06-09-2017 07:35AM

solodeogloria wrote: »

Thirdly - the UK is advocating free travel across the border and free travel for EU citizens into the UK. Just not free rights to work.

Finally - there are two parties in the negotiations. If the UK advocates for a frictionless border and Brussels insists otherwise the only rational conclusion you can come to is that the EU have insisted on it. They bear responsibility if this happens.

You haven't really addressed the point though, how can you be outside the customs union and have a frictionless border? How can you control your borders when you have an open border? If the UK can give satisfactory answers to these questions, and not just talk about solutions that are not compatible, we will see a border that will hamper trade and will mean physical border checks in Ireland between the UK and the EU.

solodeogloria wrote: »

Again, the official leave campaign argued for an open Ireland border. It isn't true to say that leavers supported a hard border in Ireland.

They also said the EU will fall over themselves to get a trade deal with the UK. They also said they will negotiate trade deals while Brexit talks will be ongoing, and they also said there will be an extra £350m per week, some of it to spend on the NHS. Care to inform us how any of those arguments have gone?

In any case, it seems as though those in charge of Brexit isn't much smarter than their "friend" Donald Trump. He also famously shouted about how easy it was going to be to sort out all the problems in the US, then said that actually, healthcare reform is quite complicated. I doubt in a few years time anyone will be happy to be compared with Mr Trump though, so maybe not the comparison they were hoping for.

The Brexit Secretary provoked laughter from Labour MPs during his update on the talks when he claimed: “Nobody ever pretended this would be simple or easy.”

Labour’s Shadow Brexit Secretary Keir Starmer was quick to remind Davis that his Cabinet colleague Liam Fox had made such a boast just six weeks ago, when he said: “The free trade agreement we will have to come to with the European Union should be one of the easiest in human history.”

Davis himself has in the past talked up the simplicity of getting a trade deal with the EU, and in the immediate aftermath of the referendum in June 2016 claimed: “We can do deals with our trading partners, and we can do them quickly.”

David Davis: ‘Significant Differences’ Between EU And UK Over Brexit Divorce Bill

Thomas__ · 06-09-2017 08:22AM

ambro25 wrote: »

Thomas__ wrote: »

Well, thanks for explaining me your point of view. Mine is different to yours and I see it - besides the randomly cited legal points - in a way that EU agencies are about to "withdraw" from the UK in a way of preparation for the time after the UK has exited the EU. From my pov and understanding of just solution, I regard it as unfair and not sustainable to impose the costs for a move of EU agencies to other EU countries on the UK. That smells of punishment and this should be avoided in the light of the economical connections some EU member states have with the UK.

I see your point (shoulder some relocating expenses to help save the relationship), but it's interesting that you claim to be looking at it from a "fair/unfair" point of view, because that's exactly how I've been looking at it (I only indicated legal basis in reply to your own, earlier point/challenge about it)...and I'm completely opposite to you: why should other EU countries have to shoulder the full cost of a relocation brought about solely and unilaterally by a UK decision? Particularly when, unlike the UK, they've not had the socio-economic benefits and synergistic development effects of prestigious EU agencies like the EMA and EBA for decades?

I mean, by your line of thought, why not ask them to shoulder the rest of the UK's liabilities? why not let the UK completely off the financial hook for its Brexit folly, never to bear any actual consequences for its political actions? That would solve the animosity surrounding the "exit bill", right?

You´re adding one thing with another and I deal with each of them separetly. The relocation of EU agencies to other remaining EU member states shifts Jobs from one country to another and frankly, the EU has enough money to shoulder such - in my view - minor costs in contrast to the money those other EU member states who are receipients of EU money (and which are most those in the East of the EU). The UK was, even in the light of their "repay" a netto contributor to the EU. I´d suggest that those in the East, namely Poland who is currently about to curb her own democratic standards in order to establish (or better say "consolidating) an authoritarian regime like that in Hungary, should see for themselves to contribute more to the EU and not just moaning about the lesser amount of money they will receive once the UK has left the EU. Well, that´s another Topic for itself but I just liked to point that out.

I have often stated in since I post on here that the Republic of Ireland could take the chances this Brexit brings with it and make the best out of it for herself. Some companies currently still located in London are already preparing for moving to Dublin and if the Irish govt is smart enough, Ireland could secure the relocation of EU agencies from London to Dublin or elsewhere in the Republic of Ireland cos Ireland has one advantage some other EU member states have not and this is her geographical location and most of all, the majority of Irish people are native English speakers which is an asset in this global world. I think that we don´t have to discuss the merits of an native English speaker further cos everyone who likes to take on a Job within international operating companies has to be a fluent English speaker, whether it´s their native or second language. For those working in London, a move to Ireland is rather an easier undertaking than to move to another EU member state because life in Ireland isn´t that much different to that in GB. There are more similarities than differences.

Sometimes, I really can´t help it, it really appears to me that some comments and posters have a much more emotional approach to the whole Brexit thing and it also appears that anti-Brit Sentiments are also a driving force (even if just partially) with an interest to see the Brits punished as hard as it could get.

Nody · 06-09-2017 08:40AM

Oh dear; it looks like we're going to have fun times ahead of us. Apparently the delusions in the UK government runs far deeper than expected and they wish to implement some "Shock Therapy" to the discussions; why do I have a feeling that the receiving party in the end will not be their intended target?

Since the UK is now trapped in a seemingly endless spiral of talks which give the EU the upper hand, allowing it to stick to its "sequencing" and decide when or if "sufficient progress" has been made. There appear to be serious discussions within Mrs May's "inner circle" about the possibility of changing tack.

Specifically, bolstered by the illusion that the WTO option is largely free from adverse consequences, and that a UK walk-out would trigger an EU response that could work in our favour, there is a growing caucus in favour of applying "shock therapy" to the EU and engineering a walk out in the near future. "Sooner rather than later" is the dominant theme.

One of the strongest advocates of this line is said to be Dominic Cummings, who has had several recent meetings with the prime minister. Some believe that he has managed to convince her that opting early for the WTO option is a win-win situation.

We can, he argues, trade successfully on that basis but, if pulling out of the talks in preference to taking this option has the effect of forcing concessions out of the EU, we gain further in being able to insist on trade talks without the conditions currently being imposed.

Risks are considered to be minimal as the long-standing ethos that "they need us more than we need them" has taken firm root in Number 10, to the extent that it is felt that Mrs Merkel will intervene on behalf of her car-makers after her re-election as chancellor on 24 September – which is regarded as a foregone conclusion.

...

Crucially, there is no expectation that the UK will ever be forced to rely on the WTO option. There is absolute certainty within the higher levels of government that Barnier's current stance is a bluff, aimed at maximising the UK's financial contribution.

Taken from today's EURefendum blog.

Calina · 06-09-2017 08:47AM

Ireland is candidate for both agencies currently located in the UK. It isn't a question of should but is already.

That being said, Dublin is an absolute train crash of a city. Its public transport system is an utterly pathetic mess and the accommodation issues are well documented.

I left Dublin last November because its cost/quality ratio was shocking.

It is worth noting that Ireland becomes very peripheral in geographic location once the UK leaves.

I want Ireland to benefit as best possible but the gaps should not be hidden under a carpet. Much of my criticism of the UK is targeted on its inability to face up to reality and deal with hiw things are rather than how they daydream they are. Ireland has a reasonable record of facing reality and the reality is that there are infrastructural issues in fully exploiting Brexit.

Calina · 06-09-2017 08:53AM

Dominic Cummings? This Dominic Cummings?

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/apr/20/accuracy-is-for-snake-oil-pussies-vote-leaves-campaign-director-defies-mps

Here's the video I think...

https://youtu.be/fJjShkGCa4c

(from last year pre referendum I think)

I am coming to the conclusion that they will have to go through with it because it is clear there is no understanding otherwise.

Nody · 06-09-2017 09:05AM

On a separate note Alan Bell has created a list on the funding outstanding for Horizon 2020 projects (the subject of today's white paper) currently scheduled to be paid out post Brexit and it adds up to about 633 MM EUR which would all depend on a deal being struck on the finances in general.

ambro25 · 06-09-2017 09:06AM

Thomas__ wrote: »

You´re adding one thing with another and I deal with each of them separetly.

Don't let my end paragraph of rethorical cheek, merely added for effect, sidetrack or mislead you

Thomas__ wrote: »

The relocation of EU agencies to other remaining EU member states shifts Jobs from one country to another and frankly, the EU has enough money to shoulder such - in my view - minor costs in contrast to the money those other EU member states who are receipients of EU money (and which are most those in the East of the EU). The UK was, even in the light of their "repay" a netto contributor to the EU.

The UK is not the only net contributor to the EU, nor the highest net contributor per capita. It's really not so special.

I'm not trying to hand-wave for directing attention away from the issues in Eastern Europe which you have highlighted, here, but the fact is that -as you acknowledge yourself- these are for Brussels and the said EE members, Poland and Hungary first amongst them, to deal with. Same as all the other EU problems not directly related to 'Brexit'. The EU is not without faults or problems, and I don't think I've ever not acknowledged that.

Thomas__ wrote: »

Sometimes, I really can´t help it, it really appears to me that some comments and posters have a much more emotional approach to the whole Brexit thing and it also appears that anti-Brit Sentiments are also a driving force (even if just partially) with an interest to see the Brits punished as hard as it could get.

I don't have a problem acknowledging my emotional bias either, although it does not extend to wanting to punish the UK or Brits (that is, beyond their suffering the direct and indirect consequences of their political class' choices - and I'd have thought that this is eminently fair, surely? unless you are a 52%er Brit, that is :pac:)

That is because I am an EU migrant married to a Brit with a dual nationality kid, living and working in the UK, and standing to lose a lot both personally and professionally because of 'Brexit', whichever form it takes (yes, even under the most benign 'soft' form of it).

I have a ton of skin in this particular 'game', which both redefines, and sets new world records of, irony and collective stupidity. So yes, sometimes the anger bubbles up enough to find a way out through a cheeky sentence or paragraph laden with Schadenfreude. And I won't apologise for it.

Fratton Fred · 06-09-2017 09:19AM

breatheme wrote: »

Wait. So, according to this and the Irish position paper:
- The UK want to retain the CTA and the open border between RoI & NI.
- The UK want EU nationals to enter on their passports.
- EU citizens can enter Ireland with their identity card, and then go on to NI without their passport.
So, what gives? These things are mutually exclusive.

EU citizens need a passport to enter Ireland, as they are leaving the Schengen zone.

Calina · 06-09-2017 09:23AM

Fratton Fred wrote: »

breatheme wrote: »

Wait. So, according to this and the Irish position paper:
- The UK want to retain the CTA and the open border between RoI & NI.
- The UK want EU nationals to enter on their passports.
- EU citizens can enter Ireland with their identity card, and then go on to NI without their passport.
So, what gives? These things are mutually exclusive.

EU citizens need a passport to enter Ireland, as they are leaving the Schengen zone.

Their national identity card is sufficient. They do not require a passport to leave or entee Schengen.

BKtje · 06-09-2017 09:36AM

Calina wrote: »

Their national identity card is sufficient. They do not require a passport to leave or entee Schengen.

I can confirm this (and that it extends to Switzerland) as my girlfriend enters Ireland using her Swiss I'd card.

Fratton Fred · 06-09-2017 09:39AM

Calina wrote: »

Their national identity card is sufficient. They do not require a passport to leave or entee Schengen.

Of course, I'm thinking of the API requirements, but the option of an ID card isn't open to British or Irish citizens, as there isn't one.

Regardless though, it is highly unlikely thst eu citizens will need a visa to enter the UK, so why go to all the hassle of going via Ireland, when they can just fly direct, or drive to Calais.

Fratton Fred · 06-09-2017 09:48AM

Calina wrote: »

Ireland is candidate for both agencies currently located in the UK. It isn't a question of should but is already.

That being said, Dublin is an absolute train crash of a city. Its public transport system is an utterly pathetic mess and the accommodation issues are well documented.

I left Dublin last November because its cost/quality ratio was shocking.

It is worth noting that Ireland becomes very peripheral in geographic location once the UK leaves.

I want Ireland to benefit as best possible but the gaps should not be hidden under a carpet. Much of my criticism of the UK is targeted on its inability to face up to reality and deal with hiw things are rather than how they daydream they are. Ireland has a reasonable record of facing reality and the reality is that there are infrastructural issues in fully exploiting Brexit.

it isn't just geographic either. Ireland is losing it biggest and most influential friend in the council, which may prove costly if Macron pushes his anti tax avoidance plans. Historically, the UK has always had Ireland's back on this one.

Thomas__ · 06-09-2017 10:13AM

ambro25 wrote: »

Thomas__ wrote: »

You´re adding one thing with another and I deal with each of them separetly.

Don't let my end paragraph of rethorical cheek, merely added for effect, sidetrack or mislead you

Thomas__ wrote: »

The relocation of EU agencies to other remaining EU member states shifts Jobs from one country to another and frankly, the EU has enough money to shoulder such - in my view - minor costs in contrast to the money those other EU member states who are receipients of EU money (and which are most those in the East of the EU). The UK was, even in the light of their "repay" a netto contributor to the EU.

The UK is not the only net contributor to the EU, nor the highest net contributor per capita. It's really not so special.

I'm not trying to hand-wave for directing attention away from the issues in Eastern Europe which you have highlighted, here, but the fact is that -as you acknowledge yourself- these are for Brussels and the said EE members, Poland and Hungary first amongst them, to deal with. Same as all the other EU problems not directly related to 'Brexit'. The EU is not without faults or problems, and I don't think I've ever not acknowledged that.

Thomas__ wrote: »

Sometimes, I really can´t help it, it really appears to me that some comments and posters have a much more emotional approach to the whole Brexit thing and it also appears that anti-Brit Sentiments are also a driving force (even if just partially) with an interest to see the Brits punished as hard as it could get.

I don't have a problem acknowledging my emotional bias either, although it does not extend to wanting to punish the UK or Brits (that is, beyond their suffering the direct and indirect consequences of their political class' choices - and I'd have thought that this is eminently fair, surely? unless you are a 52%er Brit, that is :pac:)

That is because I am an EU migrant married to a Brit with a dual nationality kid, living and working in the UK, and standing to lose a lot both personally and professionally because of 'Brexit', whichever form it takes (yes, even under the most benign 'soft' form of it).

I have a ton of skin in this particular 'game', which both redefines, and sets new world records of, irony and collective stupidity. So yes, sometimes the anger bubbles up enough to find a way out through a cheeky sentence or paragraph laden with Schadenfreude. And I won't apologise for it.

Well, you´ve made your point and I absolutely understand it, no question. Just to your notice, I am no "52%Brit" and I am neither a Brit or an Irishman myself. I look at this complex matter from a more distanced angle and in contrast to yourself, I have no such concerns for myself as you do. This of course makes it a bit easier to look at it from a distanced view as I have neither anything to gain nor to lose from this Brexit. If I were in your place, of course my view and my way of argumentation would be as much the same as yours is, naturally. I have also followed the reports on the matter of how this present UK govt is treating EU nationals living in the UK, whether they are married to non-Brit nationals or not and I find it even mildly put disgusting and outrageous. It´s in some way similar to what Trump is on about in the USA regarding his policy on (illegal) immigrants.

Let me be a bit more clear about my stance to Brexit. It´s utter bollix and I have nothing but contempt for the Brexiteers. That´s my emotional part on the matter. My considerations are more about the effects on the economy this Brexit will have and whether there is a merit in making it even harder for the Brits after they´ve finally left the EU. That´s because they´ll be out in the cold soon enough and this will Show those stupid Brexiteers that there is no such "old fashioned nostalgic good old Britain" which waits for them but a predictable decline in their economy and financial strength they´ll have to face, in addition to that and as a consequence of Brexit, the Brits will be left to the "mercy" or let´s put it this way "the Terms and conditions" dictated to them by those they seek to get trade deals with. I Name the USA, Russia and China to name but just the three biggest global players, even by considering the USA turning on a more isolationaist course (which won´t be last too long, just as long as this stupid Trump is their President).

One thing is clear to me, even by considering your own position, which is that to impose more payment obligations on the UK will not improve the situation for EU nationals living in the UK. If you don´t mind, I´d say that we both know very well that politics is a dirty Business and what you´ve endured and what I have noticed from the news, this present UK govt is playing dirty on EU nationals by letting them in the limbo of uncertainty and by harrassing them in various ways (like in those articles related to the subject that I have posted on this thread).

The matter is a very complex one and the UK govt is trying to sell it to her "voters" by coming up with simple solutions that are unfit to solve the many of the problems and which have no chance to be even seriously considered by the EU, but the Brexiteers are too keen swallow all that nonsense and as usual put the blame for all the failure on the EU and not on the present UK govt to where it really belongs.

There will be a time after the UK has left the EU. That time of Transfer will be the time in which the fate of the UK herself will hang in the balance. The more the chances for an UK Exit from the EU with no deal increase, the more the chances for a support of an IndyRef2 in Scotland will grow. In the end of it, by that pessimistic but also not too unrealistic prospect of likely break up of the UK, the future for the Brits isn´t that bright. So why make it even harder for them when the Brexiteers are on the best way to finish off the UK themselves?

As you live in Britain and are married to a UK national, with bi-national children, you´ll suffer under this Brexit one way or another. Looking at it from that point, I can´t get the notion why you´d support an even harder treatment of the Brits from the EU whan all this will backfire on yourself and your family. I do understand your anger and certainly your disappointment, but unless you look for alternative solutions for the "Day X", which fits yourself and your family, you´ll all remain in this mess like it or not. This the whole negative effect of this BrexitRef won by the most stupid people who don´t give a damn about the lives of other people. The worst of all aspects in this matter is that you´ve just a weak opposition since Mr Corbyn finally outed himself as that what he really is, an anti-EU politician at his heart. He won´t turn and back off from Brexit for and despite all the lies he told to make him appear as a remainer.

I really feel sorry for you, your family and all the others living in the UK who share the same problems you face. That´s all the making of the British Nationalists and this is just one example for why I detest any political movements firming under nationalism which are exclusive by their nature. One exemption among those is the SNP, but I am neither a supporter of them nor a big sympathiser. But I admit, the prospect of an independent Scotland as some huge attraction and appeal to me. In the end of the day, the Scottish will have to decide about that when the time has come and I am sure that that time will come and it won´t take much longer until that day arrives. It´ll be the irony of history and politics when the UK breaks up and those British Nationalists who brought the UK into this mess by their intentions to gain back more sovreignty led the very country they wanted to preserve into its own downfall. No idea where this will leave you when it happens.

IndyRef2 in Scotland is just postponed, it´s not taken off the table yet and it will remain there to be taken up when the UK govt failed in her Brexit negotiations and Exit without a deal or even a very bad deal cos they are too stupid to get things done. This will trigger IndyRef2 and I´d anticipate that it will result with a majority in favour of independence.

mickoneill31 · 06-09-2017 10:20AM

Calina wrote: »

Ireland is candidate for both agencies currently located in the UK. It isn't a question of should but is already.

That being said, Dublin is an absolute train crash of a city. Its public transport system is an utterly pathetic mess and the accommodation issues are well documented.

I left Dublin last November because its cost/quality ratio was shocking.

It is worth noting that Ireland becomes very peripheral in geographic location once the UK leaves.

I want Ireland to benefit as best possible but the gaps should not be hidden under a carpet. Much of my criticism of the UK is targeted on its inability to face up to reality and deal with hiw things are rather than how they daydream they are. Ireland has a reasonable record of facing reality and the reality is that there are infrastructural issues in fully exploiting Brexit.

I was listening to a podcast this morning where they were saying that the EMA accounts for 40,000 hotel nights in the UK yearly.

I don't know what Dublin can handle but aren't we close to capacity now?

Brexit discussion thread II

Comments