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 V - No Pic/GIF dumps please

Rhineshark

kuro68k wrote: »

The British government is going to take it right to the cliff edge and hope that someone else compromises. Of course they have their excuses already lined up if no-one does, only real question is who they will blame.

1. The EU
2. Remainers
3. Ireland
4. Corbyn

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

judeboy101

"Referendums are the antithesis of democracy."

I'll tell that to all the gay people who can now marry or the women who can now access safe abortions.

Zubeneschamali

cml387 wrote: »

at least now the drop dead date of march 2019 has concentrated minds.

I have yet to see any signs that minds in Westminster have been concentrated by the impending dates. They have casually blown through several deadlines and have still not submitted papers on their proposed UK wide Customs Union.

It is possible that they will pull it all together this month and wrap up the obvious deal that has been on the table for the last year and a half, but it is still possible that Parliament will reject it and chaos will ensue.

Zubeneschamali

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

The UK is being humiliated. There is no other word for it.

The EU is not humiliating them, the EU set out the position a year ago, and has offered a big concession in recent weeks. The EU is negotiating in good faith.

The Tories are humiliating themselves by fighting with one another in the UK press about unicorns vs. Cake. This has very little to do with the EU, it is all about Westminster politics.

Strazdas

cml387 wrote: »

Invoking A50 was logical, as I said, given the result of the referendum.
That the referendum result defied logic is the insanity that sparked he whole thing.
Setting up a talking shop,regardless of who was involved, would still leave us at exactly the same impasse as we are in now, except that at least now the drop dead date of march 2019 has concentrated minds.

Incidentally my reference to Labour's deal with the UUP (change the letters, the mindset was exactly the same) led to Roy Mason's tenure as NI secretary and the catastrophic "security forces first" regime he instigated.

Not at all. This was the narrative created by the hard Brexiteers, the right wing press, UKIP etc, that A50 must be triggered no matter what and that anyone trying to block this was a "traitor".

A strong PM could have tried to face down this collection of crooks, liars and charlatans and pointed out that triggering A50 without a plan of any description was extremely high risk for Britain. They would have reacted with complete rage to such home truths of course but such a showdown between a strong leader and this ragbag of spivs would have been far better for British democracy, even if that PM was forced to resign.

cml387

Invoking A50 was logical, as I said, given the result of the referendum.
That the referendum result defied logic is the insanity that sparked he whole thing.
Setting up a talking shop,regardless of who was involved, would still leave us at exactly the same impasse as we are in now, except that at least now the drop dead date of march 2019 has concentrated minds.

Incidentally my reference to Labour's deal with the UUP (change the letters, the mindset was exactly the same) led to Roy Mason's tenure as NI secretary and the catastrophic "security forces first" regime he instigated.

Capt'n Midnight

Enzokk wrote: »

But why would the EU agree to that? Will they get a different result if they delay by a year? Unless there is a way for the UK to get past the arithmetic in the House of Commons I see no reason to continue with the inevitable.

Brexit is holding up other EU deals so there is an economic and political cost.

And the current deals may no longer be on offer, especially if the EU are in the middle of a deal with an Asian country or Switzerland or anyone else in the queue.

Besides all the EU countries would have to agree to an extension and all it needs is for one of the ten regional parliaments to go "D'you know what ... " or Greece asking for a few billion like the UK gave to the Southern African countries or maybe there'll be an internal party fight in the minor part in a coalition in somewhere half the UK didn't even know was a country.

CelticRambler

cml387 wrote: »

Triggering A50 was ... the logical thing to do after the leave vote (or what? prolong the agony indefinitely?)

The logical thing to do, given all the information available at the time, coupled with the narrowness of the result and the importance of the proposed change in the UK's relationship with the rest of the world, would have been for TM to say that "the people have spoken" and then set up an all-party commission to discuss exactly what type of Brexit the people voted for and what they should be given.

Politically, that would have implicated both Labour and UKIP - aswell as the ERG Tories - in the Brexit process, and effectively nullified it as an election issue. Practically, it would have allowed the UK to signal to the EU (and UK-based businesses) that they were still in the game and playing an active role in day-to-day European activities.

It would have become clear (in less than two years :pac: ) that Brexit was going to be far from simple, that certain pre-referendum claims were exaggerated, that some aspects of the vote may have been influenced by outside forces, and that perhaps the land borders with the RoI and Spain were going to be particularly troublesome in ways that hadn't been anticipated by the (English) electorate.

At the appointed time, the electorate could have been presented with a second, confirmatory, binding referendum, having measures in place to ensure that campaigning was honest and free from external influence. And if the decision was, once again, in favour of leaving the EU, Article 50 could have been triggered with a defined plan of action in place.

CelticRambler

charlie14 wrote: »

I would not see where, seeing as the EU accepted NI as being a part of the UK application to join, would legally leave us or the EU with a leg to stand on on the border issue when it came to the UK deciding to leave other than under the GFA.

The GFA is the key as to why we and the EU can insist on no hard border.
My point is that from the points I have already made that there is a possible double edged sword to the GFA in relation the border.

The partition of the island of Ireland is the reason why the EU included "no hard border" as one of its conditions for a Withdrawal Agreement. It's quite likely that Ireland(RoI) would have been equally successful in requiring that condition to be met if the GFA did not exist, but it does and has done for two decades. There would be no point in TM "threatening" the DUP with a border poll if she wasn't prepared to follow through on her threat, and - if the poll was carried in favour of a UI - cede NI afterwards. That would have been a huge gamble when she could as easily have gambled on getting sufficient support from disaffected members of Labour or some of the other smaller parties.

A Dub in Glasgo

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

The UK is being humiliated. There is no other word for it.

.

by their own politicians :pac:

10000maniacs

theguzman wrote: »

A second vote would be anti-democratic, the British people voted for Brexit and that is exactly what they should get, a hard Brexit, it is obvious they want out and if faced with such an arrogant move of trying to get them to change their minds I could see the pendulum swinging further right and an even stronger vote for Brexit second time around. The liberals really can't accept they lost in this instance.

The first vote was anti-democratic.
Referendums are the antithesis of democracy. The Brexit referendum subverted rather than served democracy. A simple "Yes" or "No" is not a good enough answer to "should Britain Leave the EU".
Also, voters were forced to make decisions with relatively little correct information, forcing them to rely on dodgy political messaging and soundbites from questionable sources. And because both remain and leave campaigners did not have a clue of the hidden consequences and obfuscated the truth, the British public did not know what they were voting for. And is a protest vote against Cameron a valid vote?
What problem was the vote initially resolving? Conflict within the Conservative party? All it did was create new problems.
Referendums are useful only when the nation perceives the vote as reflecting popular will. That works best if turnout is high and one side wins in a landslide.

Kermit.de.frog

Sand wrote: »

A major requirement of the UK government has been to portray Brexit as a negotiation between equals. Its not a negotiation. They're not equals. Concepts such as 'independent' reviews help the UK save face, but the EU has no need to permit third parties to influence EU interests.

In as much as the UK ruling class misread the Brexit revolt, they have continued to misread their status and the weight of their interests against those of the EU. Either the UK accepts vassalage, or they get no-deal chaos until they do accept vassalage.

The UK is being humiliated. There is no other word for it.

I guess sending Farage and co to the European Parliament all those years along with the nastiest gammon you can imagine has had it's impact on the people that matter in high places in the EU institutions.

lawred2

backspin. wrote: »

I wish the UK never voted for Brexit. But i would worry that if they changed course now and decided to stay under the strain of realizing the possible consequences. What would that say to all other countries in the EU. That they can never really leave the EU. It would embolden the EU so that any individual country that was not going along with the majority on any matter would be dismissed without a care in the world.

What would it say to the likes of Hungary or Poland or Italy with their views on immigration. They would be told toe the line or else. Because we know you will never leave.

It would say that such views on emigration are not and have never been in line with European policy.

Exactly what it should say.

What is the problem?

Sand

An Ciarraioch wrote: »

And now the independent review mechanism for the temporary customs union has been rejected:

https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/mays-brexit-deal-suffers-major-setback-after-eu-rejects-uk-arbitration-mechanism_uk_5be60739e4b0e8438897d972#comments

A major requirement of the UK government has been to portray Brexit as a negotiation between equals. Its not a negotiation. They're not equals. Concepts such as 'independent' reviews help the UK save face, but the EU has no need to permit third parties to influence EU interests.

In as much as the UK ruling class misread the Brexit revolt, they have continued to misread their status and the weight of their interests against those of the EU. Either the UK accepts vassalage, or they get no-deal chaos until they do accept vassalage.

LeinsterDub

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

A country hasn't been this humiliated since at least the Irish or Greek bailouts.

All self inflicted humiliations

charlie14

backspin. wrote: »

I wish the UK never voted for Brexit. But i would worry that if they changed course now and decided to stay under the strain of realizing the possible consequences. What would that say to all other countries in the EU. That they can never really leave the EU. It would embolden the EU so that any individual country that was not going along with the majority on any matter would be dismissed without a care in the world.

What would it say to the likes of Hungary or Poland or Italy with their views on immigration. They would be told toe the line or else. Because we know you will never leave.

It`s a bit like a marriage.

You can choose to leave anytime you want, but having made a commitment you would be very naive to think you will walk away without any consequences while expecting the ex to put him/herself out worrying about your future welfare.

Especially with them knowing you look on yourself as now footloose and fancy free and actively looking for someone you believe is better.

prawnsambo

backspin. wrote: »

I wish the UK never voted for Brexit. But i would worry that if they changed course now and decided to stay under the strain of realizing the possible consequences. What would that say to all other countries in the EU. That they can never really leave the EU. It would embolden the EU so that any individual country that was not going along with the majority on any matter would be dismissed without a care in the world.

What would it say to the likes of Hungary or Poland or Italy with their views on immigration. They would be told toe the line or else. Because we know you will never leave.

That's a tad hysterical. The only problems Britain has in leaving is that they made a complete hames of it. They didn't plan for it, had no strategy for NI, had a GE in the middle of it and lost their majority and then had to get support from the one party that would make the NI question unanswerable.

What other country could create such an omnishambles to the extent that they don't even understand their own geography? It's bizarre.

For contrast, just suppose that May had shut the ERG up by telling them to come up with the plan before triggering A50 and then, when they failed told them to toe the line on whatever plan she came up with and ran through without a GE? Or just suppose that a government that were united had done the same thing. No problems. Orderly withdrawal and no drama.

listermint

backspin. wrote: »

I wish the UK never voted for Brexit. But i would worry that if they changed course now and decided to stay under the strain of realizing the possible consequences. What would that say to all other countries in the EU. That they can never really leave the EU. It would embolden the EU so that any individual country that was not going along with the majority on any matter would be dismissed without a care in the world.

What would it say to the likes of Hungary or Poland or Italy with their views on immigration. They would be told toe the line or else. Because we know you will never leave.

Erm....

They joined the EU and it's migration rules.

So frankly go swing. You cant suddenly not understand the rules. If they want to leave and end up back in an economic back water prior to joining then go for it.

I don't actually get the problem...

Kermit.de.frog

An Ciarraioch wrote: »

And now the independent review mechanism for the temporary customs union has been rejected:

https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/mays-brexit-deal-suffers-major-setback-after-eu-rejects-uk-arbitration-mechanism_uk_5be60739e4b0e8438897d972#comments

A country hasn't been this humiliated since at least the Irish or Greek bailouts.

Strazdas

backspin. wrote: »

I wish the UK never voted for Brexit. But i would worry that if they changed course now and decided to stay under the strain of realizing the possible consequences. What would that say to all other countries in the EU. That they can never really leave the EU. It would embolden the EU so that any individual country that was not going along with the majority on any matter would be dismissed without a care in the world.

What would it say to the likes of Hungary or Poland or Italy with their views on immigration. They would be told toe the line or else. Because we know you will never leave.

You say that as if withdrawing from an economic / political union with your closest friends and neighbours is a perfectly normal and rational course of action. It is nothing of the sort : it is a highly irregular and unusual thing to even contemplate and what you'd expect from a country who had been taken over by a right wing dictator.

The original idea of a country withdrawing from the EU came from a bunch of cranks and racists in the form of Farage and his mates in UKIP. No other Eurosceptic party has ever proposed this as a viable political policy for their country.

Sand

bob mcbob wrote: »

From the guardian - apparently he is now known as Raab C Brexit in his own department

The Guardian is hopelessly biased, little better than Breitbart. Raab is a fool, but I wouldn't particularly trust anything the Guardian reports on the matter.

backspin.

I wish the UK never voted for Brexit. But i would worry that if they changed course now and decided to stay under the strain of realizing the possible consequences. What would that say to all other countries in the EU. That they can never really leave the EU. It would embolden the EU so that any individual country that was not going along with the majority on any matter would be dismissed without a care in the world.

What would it say to the likes of Hungary or Poland or Italy with their views on immigration. They would be told toe the line or else. Because we know you will never leave.

charlie14

Nate--IRL-- wrote: »

This is an interesting development. The EU27 ambassadors are demanding to scrutinise any deal reached with the UK, before they will sign off on any Leaders summit. Up until now Barnier has had a free hand within the remit he was given. It looks like offering the whole of the UK a customs union might have been a bridge too far for the EU member states.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/nov/09/new-blow-to-may-as-eu-leaders-demand-scrutiny-of-brexit-deal

Nate

Looking as we are at the stage of enough is enough. Waste your own time if you want running around in circles, but it`s a dance we are no longer interested in.
In all fairness difficult to blame the 27. It is now such a farce that somebody had to shout stop.

LeinsterDub

theguzman wrote: »

A second vote would be anti-democratic, the British people voted for Brexit and that is exactly what they should get, a hard Brexit, it is obvious they want out and if faced with such an arrogant move of trying to get them to change their minds I could see the pendulum swinging further right and an even stronger vote for Brexit second time around. The liberals really can't accept they lost in this instance.

When the facts change people are entitled to change their minds. And given that vote leave and leave.eu lied and cheated, the UK government are entirely useless. The facts have entirely changed.

An Ciarraioch

And now the independent review mechanism for the temporary customs union has been rejected:

https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/mays-brexit-deal-suffers-major-setback-after-eu-rejects-uk-arbitration-mechanism_uk_5be60739e4b0e8438897d972#comments

Nate--IRL--

This is an interesting development. The EU27 ambassadors are demanding to scrutinise any deal reached with the UK, before they will sign off on any Leaders summit. Up until now Barnier has had a free hand within the remit he was given. It looks like offering the whole of the UK a customs union might have been a bridge too far for the EU member states.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/nov/09/new-blow-to-may-as-eu-leaders-demand-scrutiny-of-brexit-deal

Nate

listermint

Interesting problems from the over seas territories.

Anguilla and it's relationship to French and Dutch St Martin

https://youtu.be/slSQlY2thLk

bob mcbob

J Mysterio wrote: »

Metro headline:

'RAAB: I DIDN'T THINK IT DOVER'.

Oh dear. A bad day for Raab and the government.

From the guardian - apparently he is now known as Raab C Brexit in his own department

charlie14

brickster69 wrote: »

Rubbish, where do you stop a democratic vote? A country votes for a party in an election to serve 4 years and then two years through the term the public can request to vote again because their views have changed ?

Brexit has now become much more than the UK leaving the EU now. It is the people instructing the politicians to carry out their democratic wishes. It is fundamental to democracy.

Regardless of views, i would be pretty sure that the way this Government has handled this matter has broken whatever trust people had in politicians for a long long time. Quite shameful to be honest.

It appears as if you believe everything that was promised by the Leave campaign to achieve that vote is going swimmingly and is still achievable.

Either that or perhaps you have always been a believer that a hard Brexit was the only way to go ?

Hurrache

brickster69 wrote: »

Regardless of views, i would be pretty sure that the way this Government has handled this matter has broken whatever trust people had in politicians for a long long time. Quite shameful to be honest.

What government?

An Ciarraioch

brickster69 wrote: »

Inquitus wrote: »

What a load of nonsense, Democracy is about the changing flows of the electorate over time, and if over time their view has changed, they have the right to express it.

Rubbish, where do you stop a democratic vote? A country votes for a party in an election to serve 4 years and then two years through the term the public can request to vote again because their views have changed ?

Brexit has now become much more than the UK leaving the EU now. It is the people instructing the politicians to carry out their democratic wishes. It is fundamental to democracy.

Regardless of views, i would be pretty sure that the way this Government has handled this matter has broken whatever trust people had in politicians for a long long time. Quite shameful to be honest.

The sole instruction they gave to the UK government was to leave the European Union, and that's precisely what will happen in less than five months from now.