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

trellheim

No basis ? Mark rutter from NL came over last time and told us to take the backstop as we had spotted ways the UK might try and weasel out.

The clock is being run down - a deal should be in place now - thats undeniable. I am telling you - that's how its going to work.

Show me an alternative.

The UK used to want to be a part of the EU

We need to ask the question: What is the EU for? And to get to the answer, we need to look at
what the EU actually does, and analyse rigorously and frankly the tasks it does well, those it does
not so well, and those it does badly. Only once we have a clear sense of our citizens' priorities
can we sensibly ensure the EU's institutions are properly organised and equipped to deliver
them. The European Union is for the citizens of Europe, not the political elites of Europe.
That means focussing discussion not on the process but on the results of EU co-operation. Only
ideologues and specialists are impassioned by esoteric technical issues like the extent of
qualified majority voting or the limits of co-decision.
People care most about the practical benefits they can derive from the EU: more jobs, cleaner
streets, less crime. This is where the debate should begin

Jack Straw, when the UK had the EU Presidency and was pushing through the Nice treaty back in 2001.

sorry forgot link http://ec.europa.eu/dorie/fileDownload.do;jsessionid=v6B0JKLMVmhn4s3gt6Tn9psT7TqSTPr81055gfZF1dSxpWLj2WZG!-1645751347?docId=105369&cardId=105369

Seth Brundle

RobertKK wrote: »

Looks like Theresa May has finally totally lost it. On the Andrew Marr show talking about the phantom 'Brexit dividend'.

Did he challenge her on it?

RobertKK

Seth Brundle wrote: »

Did he challenge her on it?

He didn't really, he asked her if she really believed there would be a Brexit dividend and she said 'Yes' and she was never questioned where this dividend would come from.

Capt'n Midnight

apt answers from a completely unrelated topic

WTF has happened to government in the UK?

WTF has happened to government in the UK?

We had a referendum and decided to let the Daily Mail run the country instead.

This comment about the Univversal Credit system should convince anyone who thinks MaxFac or other e-borders would work

(I was particularly impressed by the way the system couldn't cope with months that had 5 pay days in. Because everyone is paid monthly now. Right? Right.)

And this .. which leave voters from the North of England should pay attention to

"its real aim was to get as many claimants off benefits as possible"

Well, with tens of thousands of people* dying as a result, I'd say they've achieved their aim.

* 45,000 between 2011 and 2014. Not a typo.

The majority of the both Labour and Tories are Mé Féiners. Putting their own personal agendas ahead of party and country

sink

trellheim wrote: »

Yes I know it was a somewhat different comparison in terms of the situation faced - my point was more the gun-to-the-head lack of choice.

My strong belief is that a compromise that is very unattractive to Ireland will be hammered out, to allow the transition agreement go into effect ( remember there is still NO transition agreement). As far as I can see this is the DExEu's strategy - to delay and delay until the horrible situation on offer is better than no deal. At that point a man will arrive (not from Brussels but from somewhere else - this is what happened last time ) and we will be told 'take the deal' .

Your point seems to be if you ignore everything else and just focus on the fact that Greece was forced into a solution it was unwilling to implement on its own, the same could happen to Ireland.

I could just as easily say that Darren Murphy was jailed for life by the courts and so I can see no reason why the same can't happen to me. That's if you ignore the fact that he stabbed his girlfriend to death and burned down her house. All that matters is that courts have a history of jailing people for life.

Context matters and you're failing to account for it.

flatty

RobertKK wrote: »

He didn't really, he asked her if she really believed there would be a Brexit dividend and she said 'Yes' and she was never questioned where this dividend would come from.

The spin on the mainland about that transparently ludicrous statement is that it was part of a trade off between boris and Teresa, whereby Teresa would promote the phrase "brexit bonus" in return for boris' "support" for another while, so there we have it, the British PM is again prepared to openly lie in order to cling to office. GUBU doesn't even begin to describe it.

WomanSkirtFan8

J Mysterio wrote: »

Not sure if you guys saw this in ths Sunday Times last week, thought it was brilliant.

Thats brilliant. Sums up the whole train wreck that is brexit perfectly methinks.

Jim2007

trellheim wrote: »

My strong belief is that a compromise that is very unattractive to Ireland will be hammered out, to allow the transition agreement go into effect ( remember there is still NO transition agreement). As far as I can see this is the DExEu's strategy - to delay and delay until the horrible situation on offer is better than no deal. At that point a man will arrive (not from Brussels but from somewhere else - this is what happened last time ) and we will be told 'take the deal' .

A belief not based on reality. There will be no transition deal until such time as an exit deal has been agreed and the outlines of a traded deal to go with it. Such an agreement must be approved by the 38 regional and national parliaments that make up the EU, not just the member states. This process will not begin until there is a very high chance of it succeeding because there is the potential for it to open up a big can of worms and cause all kinds of issues at the regional level.

What is likely is that the 27 may decide to extend the negotiation period as allowed under A50, which would see the UK remaining a full member for a long time to come. But this is not a transition. They would enjoy full membership rights and obligations.

Strazdas

Peregrinus wrote: »

When the Bill for holding the referendum was before Parliament, there was discussion of whether there should be a requirement for a qualified majority - a majority overall, plus a majority in at least three of the constituent parts of the UK, or a majority including at least 40% of the electorate (so the referendum couldn't be decided by a narrow margin on a low turnout) - that kind of thing. There is precedent for this in referendums that the UK has held before, e.g. the Scottish devolution referendum of 1979.

But the governnment's position was that this wasn't necessary, since the outcome of the referendum would not be legally binding. If the government didn't think that the referendum result reflected a sufficient national consensus, it could decide not to act on it.

In advance of the referendum actually being held, the Tories committed to "respect" the result, which the honours students will note is not quite the same thing as a commitment to implement the result.

However, since the referendum result, the Tories have been hijacked by ultra-Brexiters who assert that the referendum results reflects an immutable "Will of the People™", that their interpretation of the result represents dogma before which all must bow, and that any suggestion of consulting the people or thelr elected represntatives further must be resisted, since it represents an opportunity for the people to betray the Will of the People™.

Only about 10% of MPs in Parliament wanted to leave the EU. This was no exercise in democracy - the process was hijacked first by Cameron and then by the hard Brexit loons and their pals in the press.

flatty

Jim2007 wrote: »

A belief not based on reality. There will be no transition deal until such time as an exit deal has been agreed and the outlines of a traded deal to go with it. Such an agreement must be approved by the 38 regional and national parliaments that make up the EU, not just the member states. This process will not begin until there is a very high chance of it succeeding because there is the potential for it to open up a big can of worms and cause all kinds of issues at the regional level.

What is likely is that the 27 may decide to extend the negotiation period as allowed under A50, which would see the UK remaining a full member for a long time to come. But this is not a transition. They would enjoy full membership rights and obligations.

That's a very interesting post jim, but is that last statement actually a runner? Genuine query here.

trellheim

Context does matter and I am accounting for it - and a couple of posters here take issue with me saying we would be forced into a deal.

Such an agreement must be approved by the 38 regional and national parliaments that make up the EU, not just the member states. This process will not begin until there is a very high chance of it succeeding because there is the potential for it to open up a big can of worms and cause all kinds of issues at the regional level

You think I don't know that ? I've been reading every single bit of PR from the EU, and from Barnier, Tusk, and Verhofstadt and most of the recent Commons (and Dail ) debates - I know the context, and still, I persist.

Do you honestly believe the EU will hold it up if Ireland has a problem with <whatever gets agreed in the next few weeks > ? A lot of the transition agreement has been hammered out, they are at the difficult bits <Ireland etc> ..

Greece is very relevant - small state, beholden to the banks , gets told what to do.

A slightly viable thing is transition agreement with no NI piece in it <can kicking> and that is what I would say we will get told to take. It's an opinion - you're all entitled to your own. What would YOU say will be the outcome from the June EU negotiations and summit ?

In relation to the OP above who mentioned an A50 extension, yes its possible but the UK would have to ask for it, and the ERG would collapse the UK government IMHO because out-means-out

Capt'n Midnight

NHS funding to drop below average.

budget will rise by an average of 3.4% annually - but that is still less than the 3.7% average rise the NHS has had since 1948.

The prime minister said this would be funded partly by a "Brexit dividend", but also hinted at tax rises.

Labour said the government had failed to fund the NHS properly and was relying on a "hypothetical" windfall.

Capt'n Midnight

May says any move towards trade border 'unacceptable'

Mrs May said: "In the week beginning the 9th of July we will publish a white paper which will set out, in more detail than the speeches any of us have given ... we will set out in more detail the ambition we have for the relationship with the European Union in future."

Ambition ? There's only 285 days to go.

And I would be shocked if this new red, white and blue paper didn't repeat the usual stuff that was ruled out five years and five months ago.

"France and Germany both warned the UK could not "cherry pick" EU membership."
- 23 January 2013

Leroy42

But surely that puts the whole Brexit debate to bed.

If TM really believes that Brexit will result in not only a saving on the 12bn pa from lack of contributions, but obviously that it will have no negative impact on the economy even in the short term, then I don't understand what they are even arguing about.

Within 5 years they will have an additional £20bn to spend each year on the NHS, almost double that was stated during the campaign.

My point being, that if she really believes this (and since they don't believe either external experts of even the civil servants I am unsure on what basis they can project any of it) then surely they should be looking to get out ASAP. No transition period needed.

Capt'n Midnight

Finally, the DUP or Arlene at least , are taking small steps. It's the little stuff like this that give hope for the future.

Foster meets Fermanagh GAA team ahead of Ulster final

DUP leader's 'hand of friendship' at Eid celebration in Belfast

The No Surrender attitude in the UK amongst the hard Brexiteers to the EU is scary. The FPTP system and the security of wealth means that a lot of them have nothing to fear either way. Those subject to cuts and Universal Credit delays and screwups on the other hand have a lot to loose.

via Slugger https://unherd.com/2018/06/noise-victimhood-culture-drowned-plight-poor/

A survey by the Royal Society of Arts, published last January, found that economic insecurity has become the “new normal” in the UK. Of more than 2,000 workers surveyed, 40% described their finances as permanently precarious, and 30% said that they were not managing to get by.

joeysoap

Corbyn in danger of losing young voters?

https://mobile.twitter.com/SkyNewsPolitics/status/1008037282169917440/video/1

Capt'n Midnight

Leroy42 wrote: »

But surely that puts the whole Brexit debate to bed.
...

My point being, that if she really believes this .... then surely they should be looking to get out ASAP. No transition period needed.

ay, there's the rub , only if they can Cherry Pick

Strazdas

Capt'n Midnight wrote: »

Finally, the DUP or Arlene at least , are taking small steps. It's the little stuff like this that give hope for the future.

Foster meets Fermanagh GAA team ahead of Ulster final

DUP leader's 'hand of friendship' at Eid celebration in Belfast

The No Surrender attitude in the UK amongst the hard Brexiteers to the EU is scary. The FPTP system and the security of wealth means that a lot of them have nothing to fear either way. Those subject to cuts and Universal Credit delays and screwups on the other hand have a lot to loose.

via Slugger https://unherd.com/2018/06/noise-victimhood-culture-drowned-plight-poor/

I think Arlene is one of the more moderate members of the DUP. Some of her MPs are more hardline and she often gets (unfairly) lumped in with them.

trellheim

Mrs May said: "In the week beginning the 9th of July we will publish a white paper which will set out, in more detail than the speeches any of us have given ... we will set out in more detail the ambition we have for the relationship with the European Union in future."

You will note that this is after the EU summit . There is shenanigans going on here because the time for this was before the summit so it could be considered then.

RobertKK

She can’t believe what she is actually saying...
https://twitter.com/marrshow/status/1008269978116579329?s=21

When the experts say there will be a £15 billion hole in the finances.

Leroy42

And if she does believe it then why all the angst and debate about Brexit. It should be done and dusted. 'Thank you EU, its been great, but we are better off without you.'

Not only are they going to able to pocket the savings on the annual contributions, but obviously she believes that at worst there will be no material negative effects on the UK economy.

Why even look for the 2 years, never mind a transition? And if they hold all these benefits then on what basis is she agreeing to any requests from the EU so far?

It simply makes no logical sense and that she is allowed to simply state this in an interview with no questioning at all is a serious lack of integrity from the BBC

Enzokk

RobertKK wrote: »

Looks like Theresa May has finally totally lost it. On the Andrew Marr show talking about the phantom 'Brexit dividend'.
If she has bought into that crap then a no deal Brexit is looking more likely.

I can't quite get the angle here. Everyone and their dog should know there will be no "Brexit dividend" but they are trying to sell one. Are they doing this because they are just the worst government for many years? Or has she chosen a path and is trying to sell to people that it will be alright because the NHS is getting more money, even when they exit the EU with a Canada type deal?

I think we are heading towards a hard Brexit here, even if there is a deal. The deal will be a FTA only and NI will be left on the scrap heap by Theresa May. The DUP will take this because it is in their voters best interest, but they will sell it as betrayal. They will keep the Tories in power though, because that way they control NI politics by keeping Stormont empty and dictating what the NI Secretary does via Theresa May.

Also, this is another lie from Theresa May. She is openly lying to the British public, just like Boris Johnson did with his red bus. Maybe the plan is to keep him in check to keep her in office another month.

sink

trellheim wrote: »

Do you honestly believe the EU will hold it up if Ireland has a problem with <whatever gets agreed in the next few weeks > ? A lot of the transition agreement has been hammered out, they are at the difficult bits <Ireland etc> ..

Greece is very relevant - small state, beholden to the banks , gets told what to do.

Okay so you say you've accounted for context but still insist that the EU will betray Ireland for the benefit of the UK, selling it's out own interest at the same time. Lets examine the exact consequences of such a deal for the EU

Benefits

EU can lessen damage to a large export market (this is also in Ireland's interests to an even greater degree)

Negatives

EU has to secure a new border in order to protect the single market from unfair competition
It has to secure a border of an unwilling member state, where it relies solely on said member state to enforce rules
EU has to deal with a growing security situation on it western border, where it's already dealing with serious concerns on its eastern border
EU demonstrates that it's unable to protect member states interest against competing interests of non-members
EU demonstrates that it can be pushed around if a big enough stick is used (think US trade dispute)
EU loses privileged access to a large export market and damages exports (even if less than in a no-deal senario)

You're making the same mistake that Brexit strategists (and I use that term loosely) have by thinking that the barest economic interests can outweigh the political interests of the EU.

Even the Greek situation was driven by political concerns that voters in Northern Europe could not countenance paying for the perceived largess of the Greek government and people when they themselves were making economic sacrifices. Greece would have be far easier to solve if Merkel and co did not have to consider their own domestic political interests and instead could focus solely on the economics.

You will have to demonstrate with more clarity why you think the deal the UK wants will benefit the EU more than no-deal, baring in mind that the exact same can be said for Ireland.

trellheim wrote: »

It's an opinion - you're all entitled to your own

I know you're entitled to your opinion, I'm not attacking your right to an opinion. TBH this shows a lack of foundation to your argument if you're starting to feel your right to an opinion is being challenged.

trellheim wrote: »

What would YOU say will be the outcome from the June EU negotiations and summit ?

I would say can kicking is most likely, which will lead to a no-deal cash out next March. I don't believe that will last long as Theresa May's government is guaranteed to collapse. There will be an election and a possible split in the Tory party.

At that stage a hard no-deal brexit will be reality. Imports and exports will crash leading to food shortages (not starvation, just not being able to find your favourite brand of vegetable extract paste), medicine shortages (not all medicines just some specific medicines) and a contracting economy with rising unemployment, inflation etc.

The hard brextremists will no llonger be able to paint a rosy picture of sunlit green fields. Immigration will no longer be the number one factor, the immediate crisis will outweigh all other considerations. The remain side of the Tory party will take over or else the party will split. Corbyn will also campaign on signing a deal on customs and the single market.

The UK will be back within a year looking to sign a deal with the EU along the lines they EU has laid out since the beginning.

The only plausible alternative is that the Theresa May caves and reaches across the aisle for support to pass a soft brexit. However i think this is becoming more unlikely.

trellheim

Okay so you say you've accounted for context but still insist that the EU will betray Ireland for the benefit of the UK, selling it's out own interest at the same time. Lets examine the exact consequences of such a deal for the EU

That is not what I said. Betrayal is the word you are using, not I. Perhaps realpolitik might be more useful as a term, and taking the EU interests over the individual . Although that is over-selling what is likely to be two or three key decision makers on the EU side making what they consider to be a pragmatic decision that the UK will never be able to decide this, and taking matters in hand to sell something to the EU27 that the UK will also agree to.

That pragmatic decision may ( likely) include an unpleasant sort of fudge of the NI issue. If that does happen then, Irish internal politics will come quickly to the fore and you may see an election quickly on our side as well.

I may be wrong - indeed I hope I am but I cannot see an alternative. It suits the ERG to crash out March 2019 ( at this stage they can see it in their grasp ) and the UK media will be happy to sell no-deal as EU messing. UK Labour are in favour of Brexit

J Mysterio

RobertKK wrote: »

She can’t believe what she is actually saying...
https://twitter.com/marrshow/status/1008269978116579329?s=21

When the experts say there will be a £15 billion hole in the finances.

I'm starting to really hate this woman, she is beneath contempt.

J Mysterio

Leroy42 wrote: »

And if she does believe it then why all the angst and debate about Brexit. It should be done and dusted. 'Thank you EU, its been great, but we are better off without you.'

Not only are they going to able to pocket the savings on the annual contributions, but obviously she believes that at worst there will be no material negative effects on the UK economy.

Why even look for the 2 years, never mind a transition? And if they hold all these benefits then on what basis is she agreeing to any requests from the EU so far?

It simply makes no logical sense and that she is allowed to simply state this in an interview with no questioning at all is a serious lack of integrity from the BBC

This.

The way May tries to put on her 'excited' persona makes me ill. And the canned lines 'I thought you were going to ask that' - how many times have we heard this? Is it all pre-arranged?

Charles Babbage

trellheim wrote: »

I may be wrong - indeed I hope I am but I cannot see an alternative. It suits the ERG to crash out March 2019 ( at this stage they can see it in their grasp ) and the UK media will be happy to sell no-deal as EU messing. UK Labour are in favour of Brexit

Labour are not in favour a "no deal" Brexit. They are likely to show some flexibility on NI and would be able to build a deal.

Harika

RobertKK wrote: »

She can’t believe what she is actually saying...
https://twitter.com/marrshow/status/1008269978116579329?s=21

When the experts say there will be a £15 billion hole in the finances.

That's a tactic, May replaces only what is lost but claims that the NHS gets more. Same happened in Austria with tuition fees, the minister claimed that this would go fully to the universities where it is hard to argue against it. Meanwhile the university budget was slashed so the additional fees only compensate for what was deducted.

Enzokk

J Mysterio wrote: »

This.

The way May tries to put on her 'excited' persona makes me ill. And the canned lines 'I thought you were going to ask that' - how many times have we heard this? Is it all pre-arranged?

The BBC has abdicated their responsibility in fear of more funding cuts. The softly softly approach they take towards interviews with Brexiteers and the their goal to find "balance" means they actually give more time to the minority position. They are not balanced in their quest to be balanced, and to be honest they should be able to tell someone if they are an idiot without trying to appease them.

Charles Babbage wrote: »

Labour are not in favour a "no deal" Brexit. They are likely to show some flexibility on NI, one sticking issue and would be able to build a deal.

Labour seems to want their cake and to eat it as well. They want to trade with the EU and be in a customs union but make their own trade deals. The only difference I can see at the moment is that Labour will allow NI to be tied to the single market and the customs union to avoid a border and protect the GFA. At the moment they have no shackles around their necks on NI and as Barnier pointed out could sell a sea border as nothing more or less than what is happening now with checks that I believe does happen.

Enzokk

Harika wrote: »

That's a tactic, May replaces only what is lost but claims that the NHS gets more. Same happened in Austria with tuition fees, the minister claimed that this would go fully to the universities where it is hard to argue against it. Meanwhile the university budget was slashed so the additional fees only compensate for what was deducted.

She is trying to hoodwink the public and some will fall for it. She really is the worst PM off all time in my opinion. She has been caught as the architect of the hostile environment that caused so much misery to their own citizens. She caused her friend to lose her cabinet position due to that. She also recommended Christopher Pope to be knighted 6 months ago. Her actions speak louder than anything that she may say (he initial speech when she became PM was about how she was all for the little guy, yet look at what she has done). Here she is trying...trying to explain the inexplicable.

https://twitter.com/BBCNews/status/1008278694714961920