Brexit discussion thread II

Water John · 03-12-2017 11:43PM

Both Press Reviewers on Sky, very supportive of Irish case. Good to hear reasonable voices.

Leroy42 · 03-12-2017 11:44PM

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

According to the Telegraph story Ireland wants "regulatory convergence" between north and south written in stone.

British govt sources annoyed - say Ireland has put on the table something no British govt could ever agree to.

Paper says UK officials very pessimistic about prospect of deal.

So what is their alternative?

The Rape of Lucretia · 03-12-2017 11:48PM

Samaris wrote: »

I can't agree that it is a good strategy. Because everyone's back is against a wall and Britain has most to lose.

Ireland loses out both economically and socially if there's a hard border on the island. It is the worst case scenario. NI loses out on the same as well and the DUP propping up the Tories is a complication. Britain loses out to some extent, mostly through the damage it will cause NI.

Not really. The point of a game of chicken is that you are betting the other guy will blink first. In this case, that the EU, faced with the decision of denying the UK free access to the single marked, and by consequence a border on the island of Ireland, will baulk, and not do so. Citing peace, stability, economic impact on Eire, the peace process and GF Agreement, a desire to work positively in the future with the UK in trade, yadda, yadda, yadda. And so give the UK a good deal.
Yes, the UK overall has the most to lose - that why it has little choice but to play a high risk game like this one.

Panrich · 03-12-2017 11:49PM

Leroy42 wrote: »

So what is their alternative?

This is where Brexit meets reality. The DUP/Some Tories will not countenance a sea border so May cannot offer that up even if she wanted to. Ireland cannot relent on the border as it would be political suicide for the party that agreed to a hard border.

Junkyard Tom · 03-12-2017 11:49PM

I suspect the British have one eye, and both hands, on Scotland when they're negotiating about the north's future. The British don't want the Scots to see the north getting something that the SNP could use as a basis for pushing to leave the UK.

Panrich · 03-12-2017 11:54PM

The Rape of Lucretia wrote: »

Not really. The point of a game of chicken is that you are betting the other guy will blink first. In this case, that the EU, faced with the decision of denying the UK free access to the single marked, and by consequence a border on the island of Ireland, will baulk, and not do so. Citing peace, stability, economic impact on Eire, the peace process and GF Agreement, a desire to work positively in the future with the UK in trade, yadda, yadda, yadda. And so give the UK a good deal.
Yes, the UK overall has the most to lose - that why it has little choice but to play a high risk game like this one.

No Irish politician will agree to a hard border. It is simply politically ruinous to do so. If it comes about because they will not agree to allow the UK move on, then that is the least worst scenario. This is a point that is lost on UK politicians and analysts.

The Irish position is simple. If the UK want a hard border, they are going to have to be the ones that call it. If the UK Government think that this is brinksmanship or a game of chicken, they are mistaken.

Bit cynical · 04-12-2017 12:00AM

Panrich wrote: »

No Irish politician will agree to a hard border.

Problem is that disagreement also equals hard border. Our veto can only be used to stop an agreement. It can't be used to force an agreement favourable to us.

Panrich · 04-12-2017 12:04AM

Bit cynical wrote: »

Problem is that disagreement also equals hard border. Our veto can only be used to stop an agreement. It can't be used to force an agreement favourable to us.

If a hard border arises from our stance, then it is through a pursuit of a soft border. If we capitulate and agree to move the talks on then a hard border or indeed the shape of any potential border will fall outside our control.

The Rape of Lucretia · 04-12-2017 12:12AM

Panrich wrote: »

No Irish politician will agree to a hard border.

Exactly ! Thats why the UK can play it this way, calling the EU's bluff that it will draw a border. It knows Ireland/the EU wont. So it can keep bouncing this one back to them. Effectively forcing and free trade agreement.

The UK negotiators are pretty dumb. But not quite as dumb as some would like to make them out to be.

Panrich · 04-12-2017 12:15AM

The Rape of Lucretia wrote: »

Exactly ! Thats why the UK can play it this way, calling the EU's bluff that it will draw a border. It knows Ireland/the EU wont. So it can keep bouncing this one back to them. Effectively forcing and free trade agreement.

The UK negotiators are pretty dumb. But not quite as dumb as some would like to make them out to be.

How are they going to get past phase 1?

Blowfish · 04-12-2017 12:21AM

Panrich wrote: »

No Irish politician will agree to a hard border. It is simply politically ruinous to do so. If it comes about because they will not agree to allow the UK move on, then that is the least worst scenario. This is a point that is lost on UK politicians and analysts.

The Irish position is simple. If the UK want a hard border, they are going to have to be the ones that call it. If the UK Government think that this is brinksmanship or a game of chicken, they are mistaken.

Indeed, I don't think they realise that any Irish politician who doesn't fight as much as possible to prevent the hard border will immediately become unelectable and may even sink their entire party for a long time.

Bit cynical · 04-12-2017 12:21AM

Panrich wrote: »

If a hard border arises from our stance, then it is through a pursuit of a soft border.

If the end result of our actions is a hard border, does it really matter what we have been ostensibly pursuing?

It seems to me that the easiest way for Ireland to ensure a hard border is to veto anything that changes the way things are at the moment knowing that no matter what sort of Brexit occurs, short of the UK remaining in the single market (which they are not going to do), things must change.

If we know that things must change, then vetoing anything other than the status quo wrt the border is, in effect, bringing about the hard border. We haven't really been pursuing a soft border; only pretending to do so.

Our actions in these negotiations only makes sense if we actually want a hard border despite saying otherwise.

The Rape of Lucretia · 04-12-2017 12:21AM

Panrich wrote: »

How are they going to get past phase 1?

By mutual fudge, and pushing the line that the border solution is intricately bound in the trade agreement (and there is an undeniable argument on this line, despite an understandable opening position from the EU, that there isnt).

The Rape of Lucretia · 04-12-2017 12:22AM

Blowfish wrote: »

I don't think they realise that any Irish politician who doesn't fight as much as possible to prevent the hard border will immediately become unelectable and may even sink their entire party for a long time.

They do realise this !
Its this very knowledge that gives them leverage to force a good trade deal.

Panrich · 04-12-2017 12:34AM

The Rape of Lucretia wrote: »

By mutual fudge, and pushing the line that the border solution is intricately bound in the trade agreement (and there is an undeniable argument on this line, despite an understandable opening position from the EU, that there isnt).

Our biggest fear is not a hard border although it is a big fear. Our main concern is the GFA and upholding the progress that has been made. There is a sizeable number of nationalists in the North that are not being represented by their government who voted to remain in the EU.

We MUST not let the UK fudge on this issue and then let them subsequently use it as a tool to blackmail the EU during phase 2.

We have no ultimate control of whether the UK will not come to their senses on the border issue. Their red lines make regulatory divergence a given and therefore a border seems inevitable.

We cannot be seen to acquiesce to that.

It seems that as you predict the UK is banking on us being more afraid of the consequences of a hard border than trying to protect the GFA with all the means at our disposal.

Bit cynical · 04-12-2017 12:49AM

The Rape of Lucretia wrote: »

They do realise this !
Its this very knowledge that gives them leverage to force a good trade deal.

I think the UK politicians overestimate the extent to which the border in Ireland is an important issue in the EU as a whole.

sink · 04-12-2017 12:54AM

The Rape of Lucretia wrote: »

Exactly ! Thats why the UK can play it this way, calling the EU's bluff that it will draw a border. It knows Ireland/the EU wont. So it can keep bouncing this one back to them. Effectively forcing and free trade agreement.

The UK negotiators are pretty dumb. But not quite as dumb as some would like to make them out to be.

No agreement is an unstable situation and will not last long. Any agreement will be permanent.

The Irish government can never sign an agreement that would still require permanent border controls. Even though border might be more limited than an no deal scenario, any border controls whatsoever are politically unacceptable as the risk of sliding down a very dark path is far too real.

If negotiations fail and the UK leaves without a deal and a border is imposed. The UK will suffer serious economic damage which will cause the collapse of the government. There will be elections and a new government led by Labour will sign an agreement with the EU that allows the border to be open.

If the Tories/DUP are really willing to beak away without an agreement if they don't get their way, we can either choose between a lot of pain in the short term but with a better settlement in the long term or we can bow to their demands a lose out permanently.

Blowfish · 04-12-2017 12:55AM

The Rape of Lucretia wrote: »

They do realise this !
Its this very knowledge that gives them leverage to force a good trade deal.

I'd say the opposite. If Irish politicians allow any fudge that results in a noticable border, then they are finished. This means that they have to be completely inflexible in phase 1 and not allow any compromise of a 'soft border', to the point of vetoing it all the way to the leave date if they must. If it gets that far and the UK still haven't agreed to a 'no border' proposal and end up with no deal, I don't see the Irish population punishing the politicians for it.

Bit cynical · 04-12-2017 01:01AM

Blowfish wrote: »

I'd say the opposite. If Irish politicians allow any fudge that results in a hard border, then they are finished. This means that they have to be completely inflexible in phase 1 and not allow any compromise of a 'soft border', to the point of vetoing it all the way to the leave date if they must. If it gets that far and the UK still haven't agreed to a 'no border' proposal and end up with no deal, I don't see the Irish population punishing the politicians for it.

Even though in such event we end up with the hardest of hard borders? I think in such a scenario, the Irish politicians might be able to get away with blaming the Brits for a while, but eventually it will become apparent that Irish politicians have played a part in screwing the country over.

But I do understand the dilemma Irish politicians are in. If they agree to something even slightly harder than the border we have, they will immediately be blamed for that slight hardening. So they have no choice really but to go on vetoing anything that is put forward even while knowing full well that the end result is a much harder border than would otherwise be the case. Their hope, presumably, is that they will be drawing their pension by the time blame gets attached to them.

sink · 04-12-2017 01:07AM

Bit cynical wrote: »

Even though in such event we end up with the hardest of hard borders? I think in such a scenario, the Irish politicians might be able to get away with blaming the Brits for a while, but eventually it will become apparent that Irish politicians have played a part in screwing the country over.

But I do understand the dilemma Irish politicians are in. If they agree to something even slightly harder than the border we have, they will immediately be blamed for that slight hardening. So they have no choice really but to go on vetoing anything that is put forward even while knowing full well that the end result is a much harder border than would otherwise be the case. Their hope, presumably, is that they will be drawing their pension by the time blame gets attached to them.

Do you honestly see the UK government not signing any kind of trade deal with the EU as permanent state of affairs? They just barely had support to pull out of the EU when it was all going to be all roses and sunshine. As soon as the screws starts turning every politician in the land will be facing a very angry electorate and will be sent back to the EU to get any sort of deal they can.

The Rape of Lucretia · 04-12-2017 01:07AM

Blowfish wrote: »

I'd say the opposite. If Irish politicians allow any fudge that results in a noticable border, then they are finished. This means that they have to be completely inflexible in phase 1 and not allow any compromise of a 'soft border', to the point of vetoing it all the way to the leave date if they must. If it gets that far and the UK still haven't agreed to a 'no border' proposal and end up with no deal, I don't see the Irish population punishing the politicians for it.

'no deal' is a border.

I dont seem to be making myself clear. Ireland doesnt want a border. The Eu doesnt want a border. The UK doesnt want a border. So, through whatever machinations, posturing, and last minute brinkmanship, a means will be found, essentially by concession on the EU side, that the UK will remain in the single market.

The EU will concede, because it thinks the UK is bats enough to go ahead with the border / no deal scenario. The UK is affecting this position at the moment : "look at us. We're crazy. We arent even coherent as a cabinet let alone as a parliament. We are trying to keep all colours of crazy in check here and find a workable solution. But we are crazy enough to go no deal/borders. Just try us if you dare".
And so the EU will back off and give the UK a good deal. There will be an open border. Johnson and Co, however unpalatable to many here and in Europe will also claim vindication having gotten a good deal for the UK, maintained the promise of an open border, etc.

The Rape of Lucretia · 04-12-2017 01:11AM

sink wrote: »

Do you honestly see the UK government not signing any kind of trade deal with the EU as permanent state of affairs? They just barely had support to pull out of the EU when it was all going to be all roses and sunshine. As soon as the screws starts turning every politician in the land will be facing a very angry electorate and will be sent back to the EU to get any sort of deal they can.

Exactly. And in that scenario, do you honestly see the EU not giving the UK a deal that has open access to the EU ? While the UK is still arguing politics yet has most as stake economically, the EU is playing economics but fundamentally has more to lose politically. It will not preside over a border going up on this island. The economic hit it could take. The political hit, the EU, could not.

sink · 04-12-2017 01:11AM

The Rape of Lucretia wrote: »

Exactly. And in that scenario, do you honestly see the EU not giving the UK a deal that has open access to the EU ? While the UK is still arguing politics yet has most as stake economically, the EU is playing economics but fundamentally has more to lose politically. It will not preside over a border going up on this island. The economic hit it could take. The political hit, the EU, could not.

The point immediately after the UK has shot itself is when they will be weakest. The will take any deal the EU puts on the table just to stop the bleeding.

Leroy42 · 04-12-2017 01:13AM

The Rape of Lucretia wrote: »

'no deal' is a border.

I dont seem to be making myself clear. Ireland doesnt want a border. The Eu doesnt want a border. The UK doesnt want a border. So, through whatever machinations, posturing, and last minute brinkmanship, a means will be found, essentially by concession on the EU side, that the UK will remain in the single market.

The EU will concede, because it thinks the UK is bats enough to go ahead with the border / no deal scenario. The UK is affecting this position at the moment : "look at us. We're crazy. We arent even coherent as a cabinet let alone as a parliament. We are trying to keep all colours of crazy in check here and find a workable solution. But we are crazy enough to go no deal/borders. Just try us if you dare".
And so the EU will back off and give the UK a good deal. There will be an open border. Johnson and Co, however unpalatable to many here and in Europe will also claim vindication having gotten a good deal for the UK, maintained the promise of an open border, etc.

The problem with that scenario is it fails to take into account any of the other countries. Why would Ireland, for example, continue to operate under the rules of the EU when the UK are basically given a free deal with none of the costs. Ireland would have to leave the EU in order to compete with a UK freed from the constraints of the EU.

And if Ireland leaves, after the UK, then why not others. So the EU would effectively be signed its own death notice.

The Rape of Lucretia · 04-12-2017 01:13AM

sink wrote: »

The point immediately after the UK has shot itself is when they will be weakest. The will take any deal the EU puts on the table just to stop the bleeding.

I really cant see this happening. The problem is that the EU knows, should the UK pull that trigger, the bullet will hit Europe after it hits the UK. The EU can afford to pay the economic price when all is said and done. And so will be the one to concede the deal. All dressed up in win-win partnership speak of course. But concede it must.

FrancieBrady · 04-12-2017 01:14AM

The Rape of Lucretia wrote: »

Exactly. And in that scenario, do you honestly see the EU not giving the UK a deal that has open access to the EU ? While the UK is still arguing politics yet has most as stake economically, the EU is playing economics but fundamentally has more to lose politically. It will not preside over a border going up on this island. The economic hit it could take. The political hit, the EU, could not.

Has anyone else figured out that this is the UK strategy, bar yourself?

Junkyard Tom · 04-12-2017 01:16AM

The Rape of Lucretia wrote: »

The EU will concede, because it thinks the UK is bats enough to go ahead with the border / no deal scenario.

I think you believe the EU cares as much about what the British do as the British think they do. I'm a nationalist but I'd accept a hard border as a consequence of the CONs/DUP shooting themselves in the head. At least the people in the north have a road map out of the mess that would be left in the wake of a cliff-edge Brexit.

The DUP know the latter point too.

MPFGLB · 04-12-2017 01:19AM

This is a good article from the Guardian on the sorry state of affairs and how the solution is obvious but blocked by those geniuses the DUP

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/dec/03/solution-irish-border-blind-ideology-dup-brexiteers

Heaven preserve us ...but when you look at the voices of Brexit ...Farage, Rees Mog, Johnson, Davies, Gove and the DUP....you cant help but wonder how did the lunatics take over the asylum

Where are the voices of Brexit that are reasonable ...and if they exist why are they not on the BBC, etc
Any politican I do see from the government just says the same old same old

" The British people voted to leave the EU"
" We will be leaving the EU"
"Brexit is Brexit"
" We will uphold the will of the people"

Thats about it...thats the script

sink · 04-12-2017 01:22AM

The Rape of Lucretia wrote: »

I really cant see this happening. The problem is that the EU knows, should the UK pull that trigger, the bullet will hit Europe after it hits the UK. The EU can afford to pay the economic price when all is said and done. And so will be the one to concede the deal. All dressed up in win-win partnership speak of course. But concede it must.

That makes no sense. You admit the UK will take the brunt of the damage and even acknowledge that the the EU can take the damage and still carry on. But somehow in this scenario with the UK bleeding on the floor and the EU still standing it will be the EU that will ask first for help? I don't see your logic.

Samaris · 04-12-2017 01:22AM

Options on the varying levels of soft border, Bit_cynical? How does that work? Does that mean checks at the ports? Is NI in an alternative-but-identical regulatory situation, or is it within the Customs Union? Does that mean checks at the border of RoI and NI territory?

It is no good saying that there are all these options, or a varying level of softness if there is no explanation of what that means, particularly taking into account the red lines regarding what to be part of. What, in your view, should be used to create a "softer" border while not moving the regulatory border to the sea?

Brexit discussion thread II

Comments