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

Peregrinus

FreudianSlippers wrote: »

My only concern is that the EU's position to date has been on the footing of EU/EZ strength; I'm wondering if the UK hasn't haphazardly and accidentally "negotiated" (and I'm using that word loosely) themselves into a good negotiation position vis-a-vis Italy.

The UK could (incorrectly IMHO) believe that they can take advantage of Italy (Portugal and Spain to a lesser extent) being on the verge of crisis to re-negotiate some fundamental EU/EZ issues to avert a Brexit entirely?

The UK believing this doesn't give them any advantage at all. The would only have an advantage if the belief were true.

Like you, I think such a belief would be false. Italy is certainly a problem for the EU right now - a much bigger problem than Brexit - but the last thing the EU will want to do is encourage any impression that leaving, or adopting unrealistic/unreasonable positions in discusssion with the EU. will pay any kind of dividend. If the EU is worried about Italy, that makes the UK's situation weaker, not stronger.

LeinsterDub

FreudianSlippers wrote: »

My only concern is that the EU's position to date has been on the footing of EU/EZ strength; I'm wondering if the UK hasn't haphazardly and accidentally "negotiated" (and I'm using that word loosely) themselves into a good negotiation position vis-a-vis Italy.

The UK could (incorrectly IMHO) believe that they can take advantage of Italy (Portugal and Spain to a lesser extent) being on the verge of crisis to re-negotiate some fundamental EU/EZ issues to avert a Brexit entirely?

Can't see that happening. All you'd be doing is encouraging other countries to threaten to leave with no intention of actually leaving (and potentially even Britain again) . Wait for some crisis real or imagined during the 2 year window and then saying "Aha! Yizzers are fecked now lads best give us what we want!"

FreudianSlippers

Peregrinus wrote: »

The UK believing this doesn't give them any advantage at all. The would only have an advantage if the belief were true.

Like you, I think such a belief would be false. Italy is certainly a problem for the EU right now - a much bigger problem than Brexit - but the last thing the EU will want to do is encourage any impression that leaving, or adopting unrealistic/unreasonable positions in discusssion with the EU. will pay any kind of dividend. If the EU is worried about Italy, that makes the UK's situation weaker, not stronger.

LeinsterDub wrote: »

Can't see that happening. All you'd be doing is encouraging other countries to threaten to leave with no intention of actually leaving (and potentially even Britain again) . Wait for some crisis real or imagined during the 2 year window and then saying "Aha! Yizzers are fecked now lads best give us what we want!"

Totally agree. However, given the UK's strategy to date, I wouldn't put it past them to see this as an opportunity is all I was saying.

judeboy101

blanch152 wrote: »

judeboy101 wrote: »

I can see that once again, we are going to have to "take one for the team".

In what way will we be asked to "take one for the team"?

Any Brexit deal is better for Ireland than a hard Brexit, that is the hand we have, a poor one. Luckily for us, the UK are in a worse position.

No, we need to hold out for zero border, and by that I mean current border status OR hard as adamantium border. Nothing inbetween. The brits won't last a wet week under WTO terms, we would still have free access to 500million people, and the EU would have our backs under a hard brexit.

FreudianSlippers

In all likelihood a very hard border only arises as a result of a very hard Brexit... unfortunately, a very hard Brexit/border is not good for Ireland.

ancapailldorcha

FreudianSlippers wrote: »

In all likelihood a very hard border only arises as a result of a very hard Brexit... unfortunately, a very hard Brexit/border is not good for Ireland.

It's not but so far Theresa May hasn't even tried to play chicken with the DUP on the issue. Surely they'd stomach a sea border over Prime Minister Jeremy Corbyn...

Nody

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

It's not but so far Theresa May hasn't even tried to play chicken with the DUP on the issue. Surely they'd stomach a sea border over Prime Minister Jeremy Corbyn...

Well after his talk about handing back NI to Ireland I'd guess DUP really really would not want him in power and May should bully push DUP with that threat. However DUP being DUP I can see them go pigheaded on the topic and let it all burn down around them out of spite while singing "God Save the Queen" at the top of their lungs capacity.

Peregrinus

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

It's not but so far Theresa May hasn't even tried to play chicken with the DUP on the issue. Surely they'd stomach a sea border over Prime Minister Jeremy Corbyn...

No, they wouldn't. A Corbyn premiership would be unwelcome, but it would pass. Plus, it's not inherently offensive to the fundamentals of unionism. Being a unionist means you subject yourself to whatever government the British may elect, even if you don't like it.

But different and diverging trade regulatory regimes in NI and GB, and a regulatory border between them, is fundamentally problematic for the DUP; it offends both their instincts and their principles. No consideration of best interests will lead them to accept it.

If May does decide to do this, she will need to find support elsewhere to push it through. The DUP will never back it, not for any reason.

ancapailldorcha

Nody wrote: »

Well after his talk about handing back NI to Ireland I'd guess DUP really really would not want him in power and May should bully push DUP with that threat. However DUP being DUP I can see them go pigheaded on the topic and let it all burn down around them out of spite while singing "God Save the Queen" at the top of their lungs capacity.

She should but she seems to lack any sort of will or vision beyond retaining power for another day.

Peregrinus wrote: »

No, they wouldn't. A Corbyn premiership would be unwelcome, but it would pass. Plus, it's not inherently offensive to the fundamentals of unionism. Being a unionist means you subject yourself to whatever government the British may elect, even if you don't like it.

But different and diverging trade regulatory regimes in NI and GB, and a regulatory border between them, is fundamentally problematic for the DUP; it offends both their instincts and their principles. No consideration of best interests will lead them to accept it.

If May does decide to do this, she will need to find support elsewhere to push it through. The DUP will never back it, not for any reason.

Except the DUP is happy to stand out when it wants to with abortion rights being the most apt example at the moment.

It might be problematic for the DUP to accept a sea border but it's also problematic for the UK to accept continued single market and customs union membership. Should they do so, people will ask whether the UK has left the EU at all as opposed to merely ceding sovereignty.

The present situation is akin to a bag of cats with each interest group pushing it's own way in an antagonistic manner ultimately keeping the government from going anywhere. We don't even have a consensus on what Brexit should entail and it's approaching the 2-year anniversary of the vote to leave.

Unless the current government can reconcile it's internal differences it will not be viable come March 2019 which will necessitate another election with the threat of a Corbyn premiership and a government which will be much amenable to the idea of a border poll.

An Claidheamh

Sam Russell wrote: »

I agree.

If we are going to get a hard border under the proposed deal, we should veto it. That will mean a hard Brexit which causes utter chaos for the UK, which will mean they either take that or revise their position. If we hold fast, then the UK will be forced to concede. If they don't concede, we still have a hard border either way.

It's poker at its most dangerous, but it is vital we keep the northern border open with free movement across it for goods and people. We should keep in mind 'They haven't gone away, you know!'

I agree that's brilliant.

Would be important for Varadkar and Coveney to communicate that for us a hard border and no deal are the same thing, but a veto, I have no doubt will expunge both.

On another note, the Brits kicking the can to October could work in Ireland's favour.
The Cons will have no time left for magical technology, and they will re-agree to the sea border.
Dup will no longer have any power, Cons plus Labour will vote deal through.

Then British general election or Cons minority government.

steddyeddy

Nody wrote: »

Well after his talk about handing back NI to Ireland I'd guess DUP really really would not want him in power and May should bully push DUP with that threat. However DUP being DUP I can see them go pigheaded on the topic and let it all burn down around them out of spite while singing "God Save the Queen" at the top of their lungs capacity.

I've always thought that the DUP don't act to protect the union. They act to represent their voters, uneducated and stuck in the battle of the Boyne. What their voters think is good for the UK isn't actually good for the UK. We see this as lot of DUP actions, such as pushing for Brexit will eventually weaken the UK dramatically.

Seth Brundle

FreudianSlippers wrote: »

unfortunately, a very hard Brexit/border is not good for Ireland.

Ì don't think any kind of Brexit will be good for Ireland. Some Brexits though will be much worse than others.

blanch152

Peregrinus wrote: »

Not necessarily.

A brexit deal that keeps the border open, whatever its other terms, is better for us than a no-deal brexit. But a brexit deal that includes a hard border would almost certainly be worse for us than no deal.

A hard border with some tariff-free trade is worse than a hard border with WTO arrangements? Please explain.

sink

blanch152 wrote: »

A hard border with some tariff-free trade is worse than a hard border with WTO arrangements? Please explain.

WTO is completely unsustainable and will eventually force them back the the negotiating table. Any sort of minimal trade deal might just be enough for them to ignore the problems in perpetuity.

Peregrinus

blanch152 wrote: »

A hard border with some tariff-free trade is worse than a hard border with WTO arrangements? Please explain.

No-deal Brexit involves a hard border, but it also involves disastrous consequences for the UK. They'll still need a deal, in other words, and sooner or later they will come looking for one. At which point they are referred to the already-agreed elements of a deal, which include the divorce payment, no hard border, etc. So there will be further opportunities to press for an open border.

Whereas if the EU makes a deal which includes an agreed hard border, that's likely to be permanent.

For that reason, no deal + hard border is better from Ireland's point of view than deal + hard border.

ambro25

With all the noise and fury surrounding the notionality of a U.K.-EU agreement maintaining Ireland without an internal border, the Article 50 timeline and, lately, the power of balance held by Ireland with its veto...it will be very interesting to observe the extent to which that aspect of Brexit (as a whole and factoring in remaining Member Stated) influences the Gibraltar question and Spain’s own veto.

I just have this notion, based on the enduring absence of consideration paid to this further UK-EU border in press and official communications for a good while now, that DExEU are going to get blindsided by the issue. For a change.

Sam Russell

Peregrinus wrote: »

No-deal Brexit involves a hard border, but it also involves disastrous consequences for the UK. They'll still need a deal, in other words, and sooner or later they will come looking for one. At which point they are referred to the already-agreed elements of a deal, which include the divorce payment, no hard border, etc. So there will be further opportunities to press for an open border.

Whereas if the EU makes a deal which includes an agreed hard border, that's likely to be permanent.

For that reason, no deal + hard border is better from Ireland's point of view than deal + hard border.

In other words - a veto to any deal that does not include a frictionless border.

Frictionless border implies that NI remains in both the SM and the CU - as far as it impacts on the GFA etc etc. Obviously items regarding say wine or other factors that do not matter to NI/Irish trade will not matter.

We should be cognisant of the improvement in the sea freight operations going directly to France. They may prove to be vital.

trellheim

Sane Sun Headlines such as

Brussels was never going to let Britain be better off outside.

The Commission was determined to punish us for daring to leave. For believers in ever-closer union this an immutable article of faith.

Abandoning the True Path is a heresy punishable by economic death.

If we make it a success, we put the sacred Project in peril.

(today, see https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/6441953/theresa-may-swag-bag-brexit-success/)

Yes well thats what you need to see with your bacon sandwich

Zubeneschamali

Sam Russell wrote: »

In other words - a veto to any deal that does not include a frictionless border.

We won't have to veto it. The UK and EU have already agreed as the outcome of phase 1 that any withdrawal deal will include a frictionless border.

If the UK does not come up with a proposal which includes such a border, the EU (not just Ireland) will not agree a withdrawal deal, and the UK will be out on its ear in March, WTO terms, no transition period.

I think it is more likely that May and her cabinet will literally jump off the cliffs at Dover than take the UK out with no transition period.

An Ciarraioch

Corbyn quoted at a conference today - wants a CU that would allow UK to pursue own trade deals, rejects Norway EEA because he believes UK can do better, just shows he's as deluded as the Tories.

ancapailldorcha

An Ciarraioch wrote: »

Corbyn quoted at a conference today - wants a CU that would allow UK to pursue own trade deals, rejects Norway EEA because he believes UK can do better, just shows he's as deluded as the Tories.

Effectively, we're down to the two major parties taking the same line on the biggest issue facing the nation. Reminds me of 2009.

EdgeCase

I don't really see how the mechanics of "a customs union" that allows one member to go off and pursue totally different customs arrangements with 3rd parties could possibly work.

It really isn't very logical and pretty much defeats the purpose of having a customs union at all.

Really, what they're looking for is some kind of loose bilateral trade agreement and one that's far less deep than CETA. They're just unwilling to be honest about that because it's controversial and would spook the markets and cause uproar amongst half the electorate.

I just see endless lies, spin, more lies, more spin, twisting facts, twisting language and being utterly dishonest about what they actually want.

I don't think they're even being honest to themselves, as they are pushing something that they know full well is impossible.

How does anyone even begin to negotiate with that? It's totally unrealistic.

Infini

https://www.breakingnews.ie/world/poll-records-new-high-in-number-of-voters-saying-brexit-is-wrong-847015.html

New poll showing majority of British now feel the decision to leave is wrong. Wonder if this might start thing's towards ending this farce as the severe damage they risk letting these gob****es cause becomes more apparent.

Capt'n Midnight

EdgeCase wrote: »

I don't really see how the mechanics of "a customs union" that allows one member to go off and pursue totally different customs arrangements with 3rd parties could possibly work.

Look at Turkey or Norway to see the deals they can do while mostly aligned with The Customs Union.

The UK economy parallels the EU one too much to justify leaving the CU for advantages in a few key areas. Yes they export lots of jet engines but dem things are bought on long term contracts years in advance. They aren't nett exporters of energy or food or raw materials. So the Norway or Turkey opt outs aren't worth much to them, if they have to take the hit on services.

An independent Scotland with whiskey and salmon and energy but restricted access to services passporting wouldn't be as hard hit.

High tech industries like Intel have to reinvest billions every few years, so for similar industries in the UK the question is where to build the factory next time. Same applies to things like car plants. Low tech service industeries like tech support could be moved to the EU or India tomorrow. The UK aims to get a chunk of the satellite market but a lot of that relies on EU companies and EU workers having UK access.

An Ciarraioch

Some UK political commentators getting excited about a new Labour amendment seeking "full access to the Internal Market", but of course, full access is far from membership of the Single Market, and it all just appears to be an attempt to stave off a rebellion on the EEA vote.

https://mobile.twitter.com/hzeffman/status/1004038161289367552

McGiver

Strazdas wrote: »

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

Bertie Ahern warned that his biggest worry is that the British government manage to push things to the October summit. Seems that's exactly what they are trying to do thinking presumably the EU will put pressure on Ireland at that stage.

This is the "Varadkar called in to a room by France and Germany for a chat" scenario at the October summit.

UK Brexit blueprint delayed until after summit

https://www.ft.com/content/c92f7ea6-67f4-11e8-8cf3-0c230fa67aec

And if that wasn't bad enough Barnier seems to have done Dublin no favors today

Barnier Rejects Freezing Brexit Talks If No Irish Progress

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-06-04/barnier-rejects-freezing-brexit-talks-if-no-irish-progress

I wonder if Barnier has been misquoted here? It doesn't tally with what he has been consistently saying for the last six months or more.

He is just being diplomatic and kudos to his patience dealing with the lunatics on the other side. He has been too soft and too patient, but taking a harder stance now, there's no time left.
If he said "alright, no worries plenty of time left" the UK side would just keep doing nothing essentially staying a quasi-member for years. I don't think that's in anyone's interest. Either revoke A50 or get out on schedule deal or no deal. Everyone in the EU just wants to get this finished so that important issues can be dealt with (migration, Eurozone changes, general EU reform, FTAs with other countries etc). This whole Brexit thing is very disruptive.

McGiver

trellheim wrote: »

Sane Sun Headlines such as

Brussels was never going to let Britain be better off outside.

The Commission was determined to punish us for daring to leave. For believers in ever-closer union this an immutable article of faith.

Abandoning the True Path is a heresy punishable by economic death.

If we make it a success, we put the sacred Project in peril.

(today, see https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/6441953/theresa-may-swag-bag-brexit-success/)

Yes well thats what you need to see with your bacon sandwich

Holy crap, this Sun article is like Russian propaganda...

J Mysterio

This is kind of ironic. The UK Carer's industry could collapse by Brexit due to the ammount of EU nationals who care for the UK's elderly and infirm.

The end of EU free movementbecause of Brexit risks exacerbating the crisis in social care and causing a “domino effect” in the sector, new research has warned.

The services, which face growing demand because of an ageing population, currently have a deficit of 90,000 staff vacancies – with charities increasingly hiring skilled EU nationals to fill posts.

But 87 per cent of all EU charity workers employed in social care would not meet the conditions for work visas currently imposed on non-EU nationals, the study by the Institute for Public Policy Research (IPPR) found, leaving charities “facing a perfect storm of high employee churn, skills shortages, low pay, and increasing labour demand”.

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brexit-free-movement-social-care-charities-ippr-report-eu-citizens-rights-immigration-controls-a8384836.html

Professor Moriarty

J Mysterio wrote: »

This is kind of ironic. The UK Carer's industry could collapse by Brexit due to the ammount of EU nationals who care for the UK's elderly and infirm.

The end of EU free movementbecause of Brexit risks exacerbating the crisis in social care and causing a “domino effect” in the sector, new research has warned.

The services, which face growing demand because of an ageing population, currently have a deficit of 90,000 staff vacancies – with charities increasingly hiring skilled EU nationals to fill posts.

But 87 per cent of all EU charity workers employed in social care would not meet the conditions for work visas currently imposed on non-EU nationals, the study by the Institute for Public Policy Research (IPPR) found, leaving charities “facing a perfect storm of high employee churn, skills shortages, low pay, and increasing labour demand”.

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brexit-free-movement-social-care-charities-ippr-report-eu-citizens-rights-immigration-controls-a8384836.html

It's almost as if the Tories didn't think Brexit through.

trellheim

Twitter seems to be pointing at news this week. Watch for where Olly robbins is

Here's the agenda for the week

https://ec.europa.eu/commission/sites/beta-political/files/agenda_5-8_june.pdf