nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

Brexit discussion thread III

ancapailldorcha

This thread is for discussing the departure of the UK from the EU. I will move some posts over shortly.

New posters, please read the forum charter before posting.

Regards,

The Politics Mods.

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

bob mcbob

Water John wrote: »

The DUP, like JRM will grumble, throw a few shapes, similar to JRM throwing, fish into the river, but do nothing.
If the fishermen of the UK think that, JRm gives a flying f**k about them, they are very deluded.

Yes agreed but below is an extract from the Herald Scotland.
As half of the current Scottish Tory MPs come from the North East fishing area, they will be out of a job otherwise.

ANGRY Scottish Conservative MPs have warned Theresa May that they are prepared to collapse her Government if she reneges on a “fundamental pledge” to give Britain’s fishermen full sovereignty over UK waters from 2021.

The Herald has been told that the group of 13 Scottish Tory MPs feel the issue is “totemic”; that after years, from Ted Heath onwards, when Conservatives were accused of letting down the fishing industry, they could not be seen to be doing so again.

J Mysterio

Rees-Mogg has clarified that he is not a 'fish thrower'.

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/jacob-reesmogg-brexit-protests-fishing-thames-uk-waters-eu-transition-period-a8264556.html

Sam Russell

If Britain get back their fishing rights and their waters, where does that leave us? Surely there would be an expectation that we should get enhanced rights to our own waters, at least exclusive rights to 12 miles or 20 km from the shore for boats under a certain agreed size. It would be a small change that was rejected in the past.

Our fishing rights are a very large proportion of EU rights and will increase with the withdrawal of the UK.

Sam Russell

J Mysterio wrote: »

Rees-Mogg has clarified that he is not a 'fish thrower'.

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/jacob-reesmogg-brexit-protests-fishing-thames-uk-waters-eu-transition-period-a8264556.html

I presume his nanny refused to do the throwing.

Bit cynical

Peregrinus wrote: »

This has purely token value. While it's symbolically important that during the transition period the UK is free to negotiate, sign and ratify trade deals with third countries, in reality the UK's limited, inexperienced trade negotiating resources will be largely taken up with negotiating the UK's most important trade deal of all; with the EU. During this period they won't have much capacity to take trade negotiations with third countries much further than "Hi! Nice to meet you!"

Besides, third countries will have no desire to commit to a trade deal with the UK until they know the UK's trading relationship with the EU. So even if the UK did devote signficant resources to trade negotiations with third countries, they'd find very slow progress being made; it would be very much in the interests of the third countries to string the thing out until after the UK/EU trade deal is done.

I agree that it is unlikely that a trade deal with a third country will actually be concluded during the transition period. Rather, what is significant is that we now know that whatever the nature of the final deal between the UK and the EU, the UK will be free to negotiate with third countries.

This was one of the principles of Brexit as interpreted by the UK government and this principle has now been accepted by the EU. Had it not been accepted, then a deal of any sort would have been impossible and this would, of course, have been very bad for Ireland - hard border, trade tariffs and all that.

Still a lot to do, of course, but reason for cautious optimism I think.

Water John

With Brexit, UK gets back its fishing grounds, at the end of the transition period. The Scots Tory MPs are thus arguing a strawman. They know that. Its in the intervening period is what the fishermen were looking for.

Professor Moriarty

Water John wrote: »

With Brexit, UK gets back its fishing grounds, at the end of the transition period. The Scots Tory MPs are thus arguing a strawman. They know that. Its in the intervening period is what the fishermen were looking for.

Don't forget that a large majority (62%) in Scotland voted Remain. A significant chunk of those would be Tory voters.

LeinsterDub

The hard-fought agreement between the UK and EU over a 21-month transition period after Brexit has been thrown into doubt after Spain refused to endorse the deal without further concessions over Gibraltar

The first sign of division amongst the EU side. This is bad news for Ireland and Britain if everyone comes out looking for their piece of the pie.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/mar/20/spain-refuses-to-back-withdrawal-deal-over-gibraltar-concerns

Water John

It may be no harm for the UK to see, not to take for granted that Brussels will be always able to get the 27 in line.

CrabRevolution

While it's not good, I suppose it's a good reality check for the UK. Before the referendum, the Brexit politicians and press had predicted dissent and disagreement amongst the countries of the EU, but in the opposite way to whats happening now with Spain.

The Brexiteers assumed each country would (as a matter of self preservation) be desperate to give the UK what it wants and would fight with the EU to give the UK better and better deals.

The talk was all of German companies telling Merkel to agree to UK demands, Ireland taking the UKs side in order to prioritise its links to the UK over those with the EU etc. As far as the UK press was concerned, trade with the UK is the cornerstone of around 30 European economies, so they'd have the EU over a barrel in negotiations.

None of these things happened, and if anything it's the opposite. Germany and France have repeatedly stated that the integrity of the single market is 1st, 2nd, and 3rd priority, not trade with the UK. Ireland are proving very difficult for the UK, and Spain are doing exactly as you would expect in seeking concessions over Gibraltar.

swampgas

LeinsterDub wrote: »

The first sign of division amongst the EU side. This is bad news for Ireland and Britain if everyone comes out looking for their piece of the pie.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/mar/20/spain-refuses-to-back-withdrawal-deal-over-gibraltar-concerns

From the article:

Spain has gained the rest of the EU’s agreement that the UK must come to a bilateral accord over the future of Gibraltar for it to enjoy the benefits of the deal struck by the British government with Brussels.

The Spanish government was concerned, however, by comments from the Brexit secretary, David Davis, on Monday in which he suggested that this was in doubt. Asked by a Spanish journalist on Monday whether the transition agreement covered Gibraltar, Davis replied: “Yes, it does cover Gibraltar. That is our view of it.”

Sounds like David Davis put his foot in it again.

trellheim

The first sign of division amongst the EU side. This is bad news for Ireland and Britain if everyone comes out looking for their piece of the pie.

What ? No it isnt the Spaniards got their Gib veto in early doors I'm surprised its not come up sooner. That and Akrotiri

Peregrinus

Skedaddle wrote: »

The best case scenario from an Irish point of view now would be for the DUP to go absolutely bonkers and pull support for the UK Government, triggering a general election within 14 days.

But, precisely because this is the best case scenario from an Irish point of view, the DUP are unlikely to do this.

Peregrinus

Leroy42 wrote: »

It pretty muted the response. JRM and IDS have both seemingly taken the view of its worth it to get out. So red lines are gone, once they can claim Brexit day, the actual details are not that important.

Or is it that they are simply biding their time since nothing is agreed until later in the year?

No. They are biding their time until 29 March 2019, when Britain will leave the EU and their main objective will have been achieved, and will be very difficult to reverse.

However bitter the pills they swallow in relation to being a "vassal state" during the transition period, paying a big divorce settlement, not getting control of fisheries until 2021 instead of 2019, etc, these are all transitional things, and it doesn't make sense to jeopardise what they see as the main game in order to avoid them.

At this point, most of the humiliating concessions that the UK has had to make have all related to the Brexit process, and/or the transition period. The main thing they've had to sign up to that represents an enduring concession is commitment to full regulatory alignment in NI. That isn't permanent, but nor it is something that only lasts for the transition period, or for any fixed or limited period; it continues unless and until the UK can come up with a way of keeping the Irish border open that the EU likes even better than full regulatory alignment.

I'm not sure that it's widely appreciated in the UK that this is an open-ended commitment. A lot of people (on both sides) still think that the Irish border is a second-order issue, so they don't necessarily devote too much attention to the fine detail.

Peregrinus

LeinsterDub wrote: »

The first sign of division amongst the EU side. This is bad news for Ireland and Britain if everyone comes out looking for their piece of the pie.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/mar/20/spain-refuses-to-back-withdrawal-deal-over-gibraltar-concerns

This isn't a "first sign of division emerging". The EU stated explicitly right at the outset of the negotiations that the application of any Brexit deal to Gibraltar was a matter to be negotiated bilaterally between the UK and Spain. It cannot surprise anybody that the Spaniards now point this out. Who would ever have expected them to do otherwise?

If HMG were a bit more co-ordinated and thoughtful than a bunch of men who've never met before brawling in a pub car park, they'd have been talking to the Spanish all along about what could be done to secure their agreement to the inclusion of Gibraltar. And, in fairness, possibly they have been doing so, but quietly. But, given the skill and polish which they have brought to bear in the main negotiation, it's probably more likely that they haven't.

It isn't just the Spanish who are getting a bit assertive here. The Gibraltarian government is threatening to take legal action to establish that giving the Spanish a veto is contrary to EU law. "Our position is that if Spain exercises a veto under that clause, we will challenge it in court – whatever that may do to the whole of Brexit". And "whatever that may do to the whole of Brexit" is of course a threat aimed at the UK government much more than at the EU-27. The Gibraltarians are fiercely loyal to the UK, but also fiercely pissed off at the cavalier way in which the UK is treating their concerns and interests.

LeinsterDub

Peregrinus wrote: »

This isn't a "first sign of division emerging". The EU stated explicitly right at the outset of the negotiations that the application of any Brexit deal to Gibraltar was a matter to be negotiated bilaterally between the UK and Spain. It cannot surprise anybody that the Spaniards now point this out. Who would ever have expected them to do otherwise?

You are indeed correct. We've been focused in the 3 EU red lines for phase 1 for so long I'd forgotten about this.

Nody

LeinsterDub wrote: »

You are indeed correct. We've been focused in the 3 EU red lines for phase 1 for so long I'd forgotten about this.

As does it appear did the UK; I can't recall a single time they actually mentioned Gibraltar in any official documentation from their intention documents, to the notice to leave etc. The only time Gibraltar is brought up is when whipped to frenzy in national pride by The Sun and the like and the "We'll bring gunboats to Gibraltar" style but beyond that they appear to be forgotten. Hence I'm not surprised Davis would automatically claim "of course they are included" since he'd not spent any thought on the subject (as admitting "I got no idea; we've not bothered to bring it up" was a no go from start).

Leroy42

These are the latest numbers out this morning;

UK pay growth closes the gap with inflation, surging to 2.8pc in January
Climbing pay alleviates the pressure on UK households
Unemployment drops back to 4.3pc, a 42-year low

They are healthy no matter which way you look at them. I know there are other forces at work, but from these numbers surely Brexit will not be the disaster that is being foretold?

Why would wages be climbing if companies are expecting massive changes ahead, or even if they are unsure?

It counterintuitive to me,

swampgas

Leroy42 wrote: »

These are the latest numbers out this morning;

UK pay growth closes the gap with inflation, surging to 2.8pc in January
Climbing pay alleviates the pressure on UK households
Unemployment drops back to 4.3pc, a 42-year low

They are healthy no matter which way you look at them. I know there are other forces at work, but from these numbers surely Brexit will not be the disaster that is being foretold?

Why would wages be climbing if companies are expecting massive changes ahead, or even if they are unsure?

It counterintuitive to me,

I'm no expert, but Brexit hasn't happened yet (so no immediate hit to the economy), and the pay growth seems to be a reaction to the devaluation of sterling - in other words pay hasn't gone up in real terms, it's just that the UK are starting to see a wage-price spiral.

Skedaddle

There's also been a boost to competitiveness due to weak GBP while still working within the EU without any change, yet.

Leroy42

swampgas wrote: »

I'm no expert, but Brexit hasn't happened yet (so no immediate hit to the economy), and the pay growth seems to be a reaction to the devaluation of sterling - in other words pay hasn't gone up in real terms, it's just that the UK are starting to see a wage-price spiral.

Skedaddle wrote: »

There's also been a boost to competitiveness due to weak GBP while still working within the EU without any change, yet.

Yes, but everyone knows it is coming so it is unlikely that companies are giving pay rises with the expectation that it will cause them more pain further on. WHy not simply hold off, easy to say that times are too fluid to agree to anything at the moment.

And sure the boost to competitiveness, but companies are not in the habit of given away profits when the can see trouble times ahead.

One issue may be the fall off in immigration numbers, so less people to take the jobs, less supply, price goes up. That simply proves the brexit people were right in that immigration was depressing the wages.

demfad

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

I don't agree. I think cancelling Brexit is a 100-1 longshot at this stage, but the path might go:

Final, final deal emerges at the talks, and is very much dictated by the EU. The DUP and the Eurosceptics balk and bring down the Government.

Labour romp home in the election, and immediately ask for talks extension and membership of CU. EU says no worries, we have that plan on our shelf of plans. Extended talks period begins, and talks reveal to the UK public that a Norway option (or whatever) will cost a lot, and give less control than they have now.

People continue to ask "What exactly is the point of Brexit again?". Eventually Labour organize a referendum on the new deal, with Brexit on the new agreed terms or Remain as the options, and Remain wins.

In this scenario, only collapse at the last minute with an election can help.

What about a massive (and imminent) revelation that ALL Leave campaigns illegally coordinated with Cambridge Analytica to wage information warfare on the British electorate rending the 52-48 advisory Referendum 'unfair' (there is a technical term I believe) and inconclusive leading to Ref2?

J Mysterio

Leroy42 wrote: »

These are the latest numbers out this morning;

UK pay growth closes the gap with inflation, surging to 2.8pc in January
Climbing pay alleviates the pressure on UK households
Unemployment drops back to 4.3pc, a 42-year low

They are healthy no matter which way you look at them. I know there are other forces at work, but from these numbers surely Brexit will not be the disaster that is being foretold?

Why would wages be climbing if companies are expecting massive changes ahead, or even if they are unsure?

It counterintuitive to me,

Where are these numbers from? I'm more than a little sceptical.

trellheim

will no-one think of the poor uk fishermen they were sold the biggest pup ever here , this dog will continue to bark .

Leroy42

J Mysterio wrote: »

Where are these numbers from? I'm more than a little sceptical.

Office for National Statistics

I have taken the report from the Telegraph

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2018/03/21/pay-rises-unemployment-falls-britains-money-worries-ease/

And I know, as I originally stated, that there are counter forces going on, but from a public POV these are welcome numbers and go against the touted wisdom that the place is doomed.

Now either companies are betting on there being only the smallest of Brexits, or they think that Brexit will not have much of an effect.

Water John

All the UK media are referring to the CA story as about DT's election. When will they get around to asking about the input into the Brexit Ref?
This is what happened, on their own doorstep.

demfad

Water John wrote: »

All the UK media are referring to the CA story as about DT's election. When will they get around to asking about the input into the Brexit Ref?
This is what happened, on their own doorstep.

BBC are actively ignoring this.

A problem is that the board of parent company SCL (which is effectively CA: CA is a shell company with no assets or employess) is filled with Lords, ex MI5 chiefs, generals etc. In other words the traditional British power establishment.
Nix is still the head of SCL BTW. The BBC wont go against the grey haired 'deep' establishment.

Both Banks and Wigmore have stated that CA's huge user profile (weapon) was used for leave.eu. They have stated this openly.

Clearly this weapon was used against the UK population.
Clearly it nullifies the Referendum result as regards reliability.

BTW Nix, Rebekah Mercer, and Jennifer Mercer just set up a new data analytics company.

jobbridge4life

Leroy42 wrote: »

These are the latest numbers out this morning;

UK pay growth closes the gap with inflation, surging to 2.8pc in January
Climbing pay alleviates the pressure on UK households
Unemployment drops back to 4.3pc, a 42-year low

They are healthy no matter which way you look at them. I know there are other forces at work, but from these numbers surely Brexit will not be the disaster that is being foretold?

Why would wages be climbing if companies are expecting massive changes ahead, or even if they are unsure?

It counterintuitive to me,

Wage growth is long overdue in the UK, unemployment figures are masking precarious employment and may be based on lower end employment.

Rising wages and rising inflation is not a recipe for success.

Rising wages is not as significant as investment decisions.

Leroy42

jobbridge4life wrote: »

Wage growth is long overdue in the UK, unemployment figures are masking precarious employment and may be based on lower end employment.

Rising wages and rising inflation is not a recipe for success.

Rising wages is not as significant as investment decisions.

All good points, but it still makes no sense to me. In an environment where the 'wisdom' suggests that the UK economy is in for some major negative impacts why would companies be increasing their cost bases?

Why would growth be continuing?

I am not dismissing the replies, I really don't understand it. Surely the economy should already be contracting, given that even the best scenarios paint a fairly negative picture.

If I was one of those people getting pay rises/new job, then it would be hard for me to see where all this negativity to Brexit is coming from. From my POV this seems like a non brainer.

Skedaddle

I still think a lot of managers are assuming Brexit will just fall by the wayside or be some kind of irrelevant fudge before we get to 2019 or 2020.

We've a scenario where a lot of businesses, especially smaller ones, can't plan because they've been given no facts. So all people can do is keep going as normal and hope for the best.

The issue is that if the political environment looks like it's going to lead to a disorderly exit, you could see financiers becoming risk adverse and credit and investment suddenly tightening.

I also wouldn't make the error of assuming that the markets are all knowing and all seeing oracles of truth. They have walked straight into brick walls and off cliffs plenty of times - see: 2008 ... They didn't see the derivatives and subprime crash coming at all.

My view of it is that far too much credence is being given to speculators' ability to read politics. Brexit hasn't really ever been very rational.