Brexit discussion thread II

Leroy42 · 30-11-2017 01:38PM

An Ciarraioch wrote: »

The real issue, however, is that much of the regional disparity within the UK derives directly from the political and economic policies devised and implemented by Thatcher, and largely maintained by successive governments. By "rolling back the State", and thus removing crucial social services, prosperity generated in London and the SE of England has been inequitably distributed across the rest of UK, with the results clearly visible in the Midlands and North of England. The EEC and later the EU was adopted as a convenient bogeyman for voters, but Corbyn's success in June suggests the argument is finally wearing thin.

Exactly. Whilst the EU has overall regulatory control, each member state still maintains vast powers on how to implement it.

The Euro being the biggest example. An Autocratic, undemocratic EU would have never allowed one or more of its members to opt out, but that is what happened. The will of the UK was followed.

Lack of investment in the north of England is completely down to the government, it has very little to do with EU. Reducing disability payments, increasing use of food banks, Grenfeld Tower. These all sit directly with the UK.

Yet the Tories particularly (but Labour as well) have managed to divert everyone's attention away from their mistakes to blaming the EU for all the ills. The likes of Farrage then jumped on the bandwagon to increase this feeling that somehow the EU was out to get the UK. Yet the very same people argued that the EU needed the UK more than the other way around.

There is certainly a lot wrong with EU, and I have sympathy for many of those that wanted to vote UK out. I feel that EU has failed in securing employment, particularly for the youth. I think the EU needs to be more open and transparent and it needs to increase the engagement of the individual voters. But the best way to change that is from within.

kowtow · 30-11-2017 01:48PM

murphaph wrote: »

Plenty of innovative SMEs and these don't need the shockingly still missing infrastructure in Dublin.

What takes my breath away in this country, and I say this coming from what would normally be thought of as very high cost countries, is the operating cost at the SME level.

minimum wages / compliance costs / transport / electricity / property all seem to conspire against both the employer and the employed.

flaneur · 30-11-2017 01:50PM

Beechwoodspark wrote: »

The telegraph is a rag alright. That headline is pretty shocking alright and does show the utter contempt a section of the UK holds for this country.

Yep. I think even solo would grudgingly concede that point.

There is and perhaps always will be a certain section of British society who wants to denigrate and kick "paddy" at every opportunity, encouraged on by their jingoistic gutter press.

I note they're running a story insulting Leo Varadkar as if he's some kind of silly little inexperienced person who needs Theresa to take him under her wing or something.

"Britain needs to help Ireland's young and inexperienced leader back down from his impossible Brexit demands"

Red lines are of course completely reasonable for the Brexiteers, but anyone else having red lines is obviously completely unreasonable.

I knew this would end up turning nasty and into anti-Irish stories and rhetoric the minute the border reality clashed with the Brexiteers' agenda. Implyimg than Ireland's the party being immature is just beyond ridiculous..

kowtow · 30-11-2017 01:58PM

flaneur wrote: »

"Britain needs to help Ireland's young and inexperienced leader back down from his impossible Brexit demands"

I think we are apt to take that as condescension simply because we are expecting to be talked down to. Varadkar is young and inexperienced, by definition. In negotiation it always helps to give something in order to get the other side off a perceived ledge.

And the same papers regularly call May boring, robotic, obsessive, controlling, inhuman....

Haven't seen the Telegraph today, was it a columnist or the Leader?

There is definitely a softening of the Irish position, it was quite clear from the panel last night on TV3, and so there should be. They have played a very good hand and they should be gracious in victory.

Lemming · 30-11-2017 02:01PM

solodeogloria wrote: »

Good morning!

I've got no issue calling a spade a spade. Claiming Brexit means Britain isn't committed to supporting European defence is insensitive and ignorant nonsense.

Britain has committed military support to Eastern European countries against Russia, committed itself firmly to defeating IS on the ground and in sharing information with other countries.

But you're not calling a spade a spade; you're trying to tell us that this-here-fork is really a spade. What the UK has done is committed military support to fellow NATO members. That they happen to be eastern-european is coincidence in response to Russian adventures.

Much whatever, rhubarb, rhubarb etc.

kowtow · 30-11-2017 02:13PM

Andreas Dombret from the Bundesbank is doing the rounds making the case for allowing Euro denominated swaps to clear in London post Brexit.

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-11-29/bundesbank-says-brexit-deal-could-keep-swaps-clearing-in-london

This is a practical example of what I was referring to a couple of pages back in the context of the City of London. Clearing houses for derivatives are a new post crisis departure, not yet fully bedded in. There are plenty of reasons why parties to swap transactions will not want trades cleared under the umbrella of political regulation at the core of the eurozone - and if currency exposure can't be hedged comfortably via the derivatives market there is a disincentive for funds to take on € exposure. Given the phenomenal quantity of corporate and sovereign EZ paper currently parked under the auspices of the ECB the last thing anybody wants is to discourage Global investors from exposure to Euro denominated instruments by limiting their hedging options.

The whole 'city of london to be destroyed by Brexit' thing is a lot more complicated than some make it out to be.

Nody · 30-11-2017 02:17PM

kowtow wrote: »

Andreas Dombret from the Bundesbank is doing the rounds making the case for allowing Euro denominated swaps to clear in London post Brexit

The whole 'city of london to be destroyed by Brexit' thing is a lot more complicated than some make it out to be.

Except if you read the actual article which states:

It would also have to include “far-reaching powers of information and intervention for EU supervisors vis-a-vis” central counterparties in the U.K., he said.

To the extent that this is assured, I am convinced that this could obviate the need for a large-scale relocation of clearing business, at least from an economic standpoint,” Dombret said. “The reverse naturally also applies.”

Also known as EU controlling stuff in the UK which is a red blanket for the Brexiteers who refuse any oversight by EU on anything such basic stuff as controlling radio active materials are not sold to the wrong type of people (which will prevent UK from buying radioactive isotopes for medical treatment post Brexit because they don't want to be part of ANY EU organization).

Leroy42 · 30-11-2017 02:21PM

kowtow wrote: »

I think we are apt to take that as condescension simply because we are expecting to be talked down to. Varadkar is young and inexperienced, by definition. In negotiation it always helps to give something in order to get the other side off a perceived ledge.

And the same papers regularly call May boring, robotic, obsessive, controlling, inhuman....

Haven't seen the Telegraph today, was it a columnist or the Leader?

There is definitely a softening of the Irish position, it was quite clear from the panel last night on TV3, and so there should be. They have played a very good hand and they should be gracious in victory.

You might have some case except for the fact that they are touting May as the one to teach him. In all reasonableness, not even her own party think she is a capable leader.

ambro25 · 30-11-2017 02:26PM

kowtow wrote: »

Andreas Dombret from the Bundesbank is doing the rounds making the case for allowing Euro denominated swaps to clear in London post Brexit.

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-11-29/bundesbank-says-brexit-deal-could-keep-swaps-clearing-in-london

This is a practical example of what I was referring to a couple of pages back in the context of the City of London. Clearing houses for derivatives are a new post crisis departure, not yet fully bedded in. There are plenty of reasons why parties to swap transactions will not want trades cleared under the umbrella of political regulation at the core of the eurozone - and if currency exposure can't be hedged comfortably via the derivatives market there is a disincentive for funds to take on € exposure. Given the phenomenal quantity of corporate and sovereign EZ paper currently parked under the auspices of the ECB the last thing anybody wants is to discourage Global investors from exposure to Euro denominated instruments by limiting their hedging options.

The whole 'city of london to be destroyed by Brexit' thing is a lot more complicated than some make it out to be.

I don't read Dombret's quotes as anything other than just more aspirational proclamations.

Well-meaning and -intended ones, to be sure.

But aspirational just the same.

They remind me of the aspirational proclamations of so many others to date, still wholly unmaterialised as subject-matter for negotiations (never mind undergoing negotiation), even if only in principle.

Until phases 1 to 3 (withdrawal + framework) are done and dusted, pragmatically and objectively, it's just noise.

kowtow · 30-11-2017 02:33PM

Nody wrote: »

Except if you read the actual article which states:
Also known as EU controlling stuff which is a red blanket for the Brexiteers who refuse any oversight by EU on anything.

With respect, you may have read the article, but perhaps you don't grasp what his words actually mean.

Such a deal would be built on “intensive cooperation” between European Union and U.K. supervisors, Dombret said in Frankfurt on Wednesday. It would also have to include “far-reaching powers of information and intervention for EU supervisors vis-a-vis” central counterparties in the U.K., he said.

Mutual co-operation between financial services authorities has never posed any problem to the UK, it is part and parcel of financial regulation and has been for a long time.

What I suspect you are referring to is the bit in bold - but counterparty clearing operations have always had to licence in multiple jurisdictions - they are operated by private companies and it is is a matter for the private companies and their shareholders. It doesn't trespass on UK law, and poses no problem whatsoever to 'Brexiteers' or anyone else - if a London bank wants to trade on the CME it gets a seat and provides the necessary capital guarantees, always has, always will, same goes for licensing anywhere.

Instead of the knee-jerk dismissal of quite an interesting statement from the bundesbank, why don't you stop and consider for a moment why he is choosing to say this? Are you really so closed minded that you must look everywhere and anywhere for words which support your view that Brexit is the worst of all evils and that London is doomed? Do you really think that the world is that black and white?

solodeogloria · 30-11-2017 02:48PM

Good afternoon!

I've already touched on lots of reasons on this thread as to why the City will continue to function after Brexit.

Back to back trading is still possible according to what legal and political assurances that UBS received from regulators.

European markets need access to the City - which is why people like Wolfgang Schäuble were saying access to the City was essential for accessing debt and equity markets and why people like Mark Carney in the Bank of England were warning that lacking these services would be very bad for the EU27.

Even if passporting isn't granted there are other options such as equivalence under MiFID II.

The alleged apocalypse of banking in the City is one of the less probable prophesies of doom that we've been offered.

Much thanks,
solodeogloria

ancapailldorcha · 30-11-2017 02:51PM

kowtow wrote: »

When it comes down to it a large part of the UK - and this has been the case for many years, has been uncomfortable with the degree to which independent, democratic, sovereignty has been passed away from London.

The British public have displayed a startling amount of ignorance regarding the EU. People seem to genuinely believe that we live in the Fourth Reich where the amount paid for that privilege is overstated. Obviously, not every Leave voter or anything but this research from last year by Ipsos Mori makes for sobering reading:

https://www.ipsos.com/ipsos-mori/en-uk/perils-perception-and-eu

murphaph wrote: »

All true if course. Nevertheless Leroy is spot on that we should be absolutely ruthless in trying to attract quality jobs from the UK to our shores. The UK has a depth to their economy that we still haven't achieved and this could give us a nice boost in this regard.

Plenty of innovative SMEs and these don't need the shockingly still missing infrastructure in Dublin.

Of course. I'm just advocating a degree of realism regarding the scale of poaching that can take place, if any.

Leroy42 wrote: »

You might have some case except for the fact that they are touting May as the one to teach him. In all reasonableness, not even her own party think she is a capable leader.

To be fair, Theresa May has drank from a poisoned chalice. It would take one of history's greatest political minds to reconcile the Eurosceptic and Liberal wings of the Tory party now. I get the impression she is driven by a sense of duty to lead the country during a difficult time when careerists like Johnson & Gove are happy to let someone else take the flak.

Leroy42 · 30-11-2017 03:01PM

solodeogloria wrote: »

Good afternoon!

I've already touched on lots of reasons on this thread as to why the City will continue to function after Brexit.

Back to back trading is still possible according to what legal and political assurances that UBS received from regulators.

European markets need access to the City - which is why people like Wolfgang Schäuble were saying access to the City was essential for accessing debt and equity markets and why people like Mark Carney in the Bank of England were warning that lacking these services would be very bad for the EU27.

Even if passporting isn't granted there are other options such as equivalence under MiFID II.

The alleged apocalypse of banking in the City is one of the less probable prophesies of doom that we've been offered.

Much thanks,
solodeogloria

Nobody is saying that the COL will disappear. The UK itself is big enough to warrant some form.

But if your only argument is that the disaster won't be a total wipeout it isn't a good place to be. There are plenty of potential downsides to Brexit on the COL.

Whether or not these ever come to pass is open to debate, even before we get to the extent of the effect. But to even jeopardize should a lofty position, to even open up the possibility of losing any of it on a misguided and misunderstand notion or breaking free of EU is the point.

Why would anybody want to put that in danger? Yes COL has a very high position at the present time, but the UK Navy used to be the biggest in the world, Things change. Most of it we can do nothing about but in this case the UK has actively asked for these dangers.

kowtow · 30-11-2017 03:04PM

solodeogloria wrote: »

Good afternoon!

I've already touched on lots of reasons on this thread as to why the City will continue to function after Brexit.

Back to back trading is still possible according to what legal and political assurances that UBS received from regulators.

European markets need access to the City - which is why people like Wolfgang Schäuble were saying access to the City was essential for accessing debt and equity markets and why people like Mark Carney in the Bank of England were warning that lacking these services would be very bad for the EU27.

Even if passporting isn't granted there are other options such as equivalence under MiFID II.

The alleged apocalypse of banking in the City is one of the less probable prophesies of doom that we've been offered.

Much thanks,
solodeogloria

You are right.

And if I was banking in the City today I would certainly be upping my presence in Eurozone countries. Apart from anything else they are fighting with each other to roll out a bigger and bigger red carpet, and - no doubt - bigger and better incentives in their domestic markets to attract me.

In due course I'd move as many staff there as could make me additional profits in the countries that were so keen to attract me.

And meantime I'd hold out a big cudgel over the head of the UK government with the threat of jobs moving to ensure that I get the regulatory framework and tax treatments I want post-Brexit so as to continue to maximize my global profits in London.

And just for kicks I'd get them to start taking off the restrictive caps on banking bonuses in London which already seems to be on the table.

Sometimes I think people really don't understand bankers, most of the ones I know claim to have voted for Brexit despite the public pronouncements which their firms made. The same goes for city lawyers.

shesty · 30-11-2017 03:15PM

flaneur wrote: »

I note they're running a story insulting Leo Varadkar as if he's some kind of silly little inexperienced person who needs Theresa to take him under her wing or something.

"Britain needs to help Ireland's young and inexperienced leader back down from his impossible Brexit demands"

Red lines are of course completely reasonable for the Brexiteers, but anyone else having red lines is obviously completely unreasonable.

I knew this would end up turning nasty and into anti-Irish stories and rhetoric the minute the border reality clashed with the Brexiteers' agenda. Implyimg than Ireland's the party being immature is just beyond ridiculous..

I'm popping in from the main page here but they are all coming out of the woodwork today.A couple of breathtakingly arrogant?stupid? statements being made about Ireland's (essentially) interference with Britain getting its own way.The latest being Ian Paisley Jr telling us the border is our problem essentially.I actually don't know if he's right or if it's just so stupid that there's no understanding it.But that said, the more I think about it the more I realise that clearly much of Britain doesn't actually realise the full implications of what it is doing (and that's really coming out now), and more arrogantly - they don't actually care all that much.

Personally for me, Britain can stay or go, whatever, but it needs to understand that it can't just walk off into the sunset without a backward glance.There are too many issues to sort out detail on (and they must be sorted out or else a bigger mess will result), and they are all issues of its own making so it must engage to solve them.And also-their outcomes may not all be to the liking of the British.Those points seems to have gone amiss somewhere along the line......

Leroy42 · 30-11-2017 03:16PM

So let me get this straight Kowtow. You are saying that the banks will actively look to move their business elsewhere and will use that threat to demand, and get, massive reductions in regulations and tax treatments.

And you see this as a positive of Brexit? If they cut regs and taxes who loses? The UK taxpayer, and what will get hit? The likes of education on NHS.

So in effect you are saying that just to maintain the COL at the present level is going to cost the UK huge amounts of money.

Christy42 · 30-11-2017 03:23PM

kowtow wrote: »

That really is the fundamental difference in the outlook between these two countries.

When it comes down to it a large part of the UK - and this has been the case for many years, has been uncomfortable with the degree to which independent, democratic, sovereignty has been passed away from London.

I hear the argument that some of that concern is a whipped up frenzy.

I hear the argument that the price Britain would pay to regain that sovereignty would not be as large as it may turn out to be in a hard brexit

But I can't help looking at the picture objectively and reaching the conclusion that by and large the British place a higher value on their independence and sovereignty - certainly than we do in Ireland - and arguably more than other nations in Europe.

I've always thought that the EU would ultimately be a generational question - I find a political or federal EU uncomfortable for a host of reasons, but I've always accepted that a younger generation might genuinely feel themselves EU citizens first, and national citizens second, and in due course set about fixing the finance mechanisms and making the place more democratic. Watching the debate here I wonder whether to some extent it is a small vs large nation thing as well - and we already know it's a regional and occupational thing within each nation.

And for those countries that do come to rely on a higher power in Brussels for political management - out of choice - it is interesting to reflect on the impact that might have on the quality of and engagement in domestic politics. One of the most enlightening, shocking conversations I can remember in my lifetime was at dinner with a Spanish fund manager, right in the worst days post Lehman - when we were hunting around banks from Canada to London to take overnight sterling and dollar deposits, there was a real panic on - and he said to me "This is why the Spanish people want Merkel in charge! they want someone competent in charge of the economy".

We really do live, for our sins, in fascinating times. I hope we don't all get so caught up in taking sides not to stand back and ponder the seismic shifts which are taking place.

I reckon there is a higher likelihood that they simply don't know what the EU does and it has been scapegoated for years for the failings of the politicians in the UK. Even now they are shocked that even little Ireland can argue it's side of the case against the mighty UK and seem to consider it a betrayal for some reason (see telegraph headline mentioned).

The EU is about deals between countries and aside from shouting sovereignty a lot I have not really been able to figure out what they want.

kowtow · 30-11-2017 03:40PM

Leroy42 wrote: »

So let me get this straight Kowtow. You are saying that the banks will actively look to move their business elsewhere and will use that threat to demand, and get, massive reductions in regulations and tax treatments.

And you see this as a positive of Brexit? If they cut regs and taxes who loses? The UK taxpayer, and what will get hit? The likes of education on NHS.

So in effect you are saying that just to maintain the COL at the present level is going to cost the UK huge amounts of money.

I don't see it as either positive or negative, it is simply the obvious move to make for the City.

I should clarify what I mean by "tax treatments".. as Ireland well knows, attracting FDI by means of tax legislation has little to do with headline tax rates, and is unlikely to reduce the overall tax take of the country (quite the opposite in many cases). If that is true for FDI, with a physical prescence, employment, manufacturing, and so forth, it is even more true for financial vehicles which can locate and relocate at will without any infrastructure. Note, I am not talking about the banks themselves, but the funds and entities which are their clients.

It has more to do with how specific tax treaties are implemented and freedom of movement of capital without restrictive withholding taxes let alone financial transaction taxes. The reason hedge funds often choose to domicile in effectively zero tax jurisdictions is to allow capital and income to accrue outside any tax net, effectively putting taxation back into the hands of the ultimate investors.

How the tax laws of a particular country dovetail with global, usually offshore, financial vehicles makes a big difference to the freedom with which capital moves across borders. Europe has been relatively restrictive in the past (ESD etc., restrictions on interest deduction in captive financing, and - it appears - the dreaded FTT in the future). The UK will be free to provide the best possible environment for funds to avoid the worst of this. It won't escape European provisions altogether particularly where assets are located in the EZ and their financing can be regulated locally, but it will be free to provide the most creative possible solution.

None of this really makes a difference to the UK tax take. The city - for example - trades about 3 trillion of currency a day. There is no appetite in the UK (apart from Corbyn perhaps) to capture any tax from that - or from the derivative instruments which often back it - by way of a transaction tax or anything else. The same cannot be said for the Eurozone.

In the end, the EZ will not wish to have a totally impermeable investment border around the edges, because it will not wish to make it's assets unattractive to global capital flows especially in any future liquidity squeezes.

A good comparison is China which has a very restricted economy even today, and relies on London as the largest clearing and trading centre for RMB outside Asia.

Edit: I might add that as the UK knows from recent experience, over-taxing the bankers themselves has also been counter productive. Gordon Brown's banker tax cost more than it raised, and so was a negative for public spending. In my Father's time in the 1970's when Corbyn's ideological predecessors got their marginal tax rates up to 97.5% a lot of the best brains of that generation simply moved overseas taking their investment with them.

flaneur · 30-11-2017 04:29PM

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

The British public have displayed a startling amount of ignorance regarding the EU. People seem to genuinely believe that we live in the Fourth Reich where the amount paid for that privilege is overstated. Obviously, not every Leave voter or anything but this research from last year by Ipsos Mori makes for sobering reading:

https://www.ipsos.com/ipsos-mori/en-uk/perils-perception-and-eu

.

Jingoism aside, the biggest perceptual issue I am seeing in the UK, and this is even from quite well informed people who should know a lot better, is that there's a dichotomy and choice between "EU market access" or "Global Trading".

The reality is that EU countries have the best of both worlds in that regard. We have pretty good and improving access to world markets, built on the size and strength of the EU market being able to influence global rules and negotiate bilateral arrangements. There's absolutely nothing stopping them from trading globally, nor is there anything stopping them from shaping and helping to create new EU-third country bilateral agreements.

Also, the EU is so large that its regulations often operate with de facto universal jurisdiction. Watch what happens when EU competition law is breeched. It's similar to the USA in that regard. Also, a lot of European originated technical standards, simply get implemented in countries around the world voluntarily both for ease of market access and also because they tend to be practical to implement too. The UK will end up no longer being part of shaping any of those rules and probably ending up having to implement most of them anyway, whether it has an agreement or not.

I find the UK is treating the EU as if it's a middle-sized country or perhaps sees the EU as France or Germany. I am not sure what's going on but they are really grossly misinterpreting what the EU actually is and imagining some kind of highly protectionist, closed border, USSR style setup, which is absolutely not the reality at all.

It's an emotional argument based in nationalism, ego and national pride vs a pragmatic argument about economics. Facts and figures don't really matter as there's very little logic being listened to in the aspect of the UK that currently holds all the strings of power.

My view of it is that unless a lot of centrist / pro business Tories start to put country before party and pull the plug, the UK is facing a chaotic exit from the EU and probably a protracted and pretty deep recession.

I'm not gloating about that either as I think it's horrific for the Irish economy and could cause all kinds of chaos in North-South relations.

What I see happening next is the Brexiteers either pushing to oust May or otherwise blocking any progress on the divorce deal and the time simply running out. The Northern Ireland border issues may end up being a side show in the big scheme of things that are likely to happen over the months ahead.

We are looking at a government that's essentially run by reacting to hysteria from tabloid newspaper headlines and extremely uninformed public opinion. It's actually very worrying to see just how broken Britain has become as it will inevitably have a knock-on effect on us and on many of the people I know and am directly connected to in the UK too.

There's also a hypocrisy and self-contradiction going on where on the one hand they're continuously talking about "a global Britain" and on the other they want to clamp down on immigration and various high profile media outlets and spokespeople are picking open fights with what would be trading partners.
It looks to me like they don't really know what they want. Is it isolationism? or is it globalism? You can't really be an isolationist that just demands market access all over the world. It won't work.

Whatever the situation on the ground, the international perception of the UK is changing from a vibrant hub of cosmopolitan life where all sorts of things were possible, to a closed, cold, unwelcoming society that seems to want nothing to do with the rest of the world, other than have access to its markets.

It just feels like is being run by the political equivalent of internet trolls.

An Ciarraioch · 30-11-2017 04:58PM

Ulster says no to "regulatory convergence," according to Faisal Islam, of Sky News:

https://mobile.twitter.com/faisalislam/status/936254970592219137

flaneur · 30-11-2017 05:06PM

That was pretty much inevitable.

The situation on the NI border is completely snookered. There's no way forward with the DUP in Westminster that will allow any kind of pragmatic solution and there's no way the Irish Government can really stand idly by and not use whatever power it has to at least attempt to a return to a hardened border.

Leroy42 · 30-11-2017 05:17PM

Why would the DUP be so against regulatory convergence.

murphaph · 30-11-2017 05:23PM

Leroy42 wrote: »

Why would the DUP be so against regulatory convergence.

Because it means some form of border controls between NI and GB if it only applies to NI.

The DUP must be hoping against hope that the entire UK stays in the customs union and single market because any other outcome means either they have to collapse the government or push on for a no deal Brexit.

Leroy42 · 30-11-2017 05:33PM

murphaph wrote: »

Because it means some form of border controls between NI and GB if it only applies to NI.

The DUP must be hoping against hope that the entire UK stays in the customs union and single market because any other outcome means either they have to collapse the government or push on for a no deal Brexit.

Yes, but surely NI can see the value that EU membership can bring, and just as we can see it surely they can see how little regard the mainland has of them

ArmaniJeanss · 30-11-2017 05:39PM

flaneur wrote: »

"Britain needs to help Ireland's young and inexperienced leader back down from his impossible Brexit demands"

The author of the article Nick Timothy is younger than Varadkar by 18 months, yet didn't seem to consider his youth too much of a barrier when he was special advisor to TMPM and by many accounts organised the government in such a way that the cabinet was subservient/secondary to himself and co-advisor Fiona Hill. And he was then one of those considered responsible for the bad election campaign.

Enzokk · 30-11-2017 05:48PM

Leroy42 wrote: »

Yes, but surely NI can see the value that EU membership can bring, and just as we can see it surely they can see how little regard the mainland has of them

Northern Ireland does see the value of staying in the EU and the benefits that brings. That is why they voted to remain in the EU. The DUP however campaigned to leave, the only other party that took that stance was UKIP. For almost everyone it seems that its an act of some sadistic self harm from the DUP. They were on the wrong side of history regarding the GFA, so its not surprise that they are on the side that is actively hoping to leave the EU and make themselves poorer.

demfad · 30-11-2017 05:49PM

The UK Government seeming to agree to a 50 billion-ish fee is a good sign I think.
This means that the cabinet is mostly persuaded that a 'no-deal' is actually the planes grounded, economy off the cliff edge scenario it is reported to be.
It must be remembered that EU diplomats are saying that if the UK asked for an extension or a revocation to A50 they would get it.
Yes an extension would mess with EU elections, but its better for all concerned than the cliff edge. So the EU wont throw the UK over the cliff if they don't want to go.
If the UK Government even try to contemplate a no-deal it will be brought down and replaced. The Irish should stick to their principles on the border. THe UK government may go soon, but the chance of a no-deal which also wrecks Irelands economy is diminsihed greatly by the news that they are willing to pay the 50 bill. They understand the consequences of no-deal, they wont go there.

ancapailldorcha · 30-11-2017 05:50PM

ArmaniJeanss wrote: »

The author of the article Nick Timothy is younger than Varadkar by 18 months, yet didn't seem to consider his youth too much of a barrier when he was special advisor to TMPM and by many accounts organised the government in such a way that the cabinet was subservient/secondary to himself and co-advisor Fiona Hill. And he was then one of those considered responsible for the bad election campaign.

I recall himself and Fiona Hill, Theresa May's two main aides were the masterminds behind the disastrous paying for care policy. Both of them were afforded quite a lot of power by Theresa May and look how it turned out.

I think Leo would best off avoiding this to be honest.

demfad · 30-11-2017 05:57PM

flaneur wrote: »

I note they're running a story insulting Leo Varadkar as if he's some kind of silly little inexperienced person who needs Theresa to take him under her wing or something.

"Britain needs to help Ireland's young and inexperienced leader back down from his impossible Brexit demands"

Red lines are of course completely reasonable for the Brexiteers, but anyone else having red lines is obviously completely unreasonable.

I knew this would end up turning nasty and into anti-Irish stories and rhetoric the minute the border reality clashed with the Brexiteers' agenda. Implyimg than Ireland's the party being immature is just beyond ridiculous..

It's actually The UK's red lines that are impossible i.e having a frictionless border outside the CU and SM. The Taoseach is is pointing out that the UKs position is impossible and rightly calling them out now while we have leverage to do so.

flaneur · 30-11-2017 05:58PM

You’re assuming there that the DUP is pragmatic or making rational decisions on policy using economic criteria and not on British nationalism or sectarian biases.

That’s a very optimistic assumption based on that organisation’s track record!

The lack of an NI assembly at the moment and DUP deal with the tories is giving a political bias from NI that hasn’t been seen in decades.

It’s almost a perfect storm.

Brexit discussion thread II

Comments