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

Mc Love

Good news this morning James O'Brien will be talking Brexit, time to hear the thoughts of the British public
https://twitter.com/mrjamesob/status/1062643189490823168?s=20

Clare in Exile

Or if you prefer something else, Jamie Bryson is on Stephen Nolan now...

joe40

seamus wrote: »

Article 50 specifically allows for the deadline to be extended, once such an extension is approved by all member states.

Realistically the UK will have to prove that the reason it's asking for an extension is to give more time to pursue tangible actions rather than, "We need more time to work out a deal". If we are no further along in March 2019 than we were in March 2017, then at least one member state will veto any extension request because it's clearly just pointless time wasting.

Thanks for that. So as far as I can see the only possible reason for Labour to reject this deal is to hope to then precipitate a general election. They then get into power (big question mark) and try to negotiate a closer customs union or reverse the process all together. I would imagine the EU would extend the process to facilitate this outcome, but again uncertain.

So what are labour up to? Surely if May can get this past her cabinet, with labour support it would pass Parliament and cut the feet from under the DUP. Anything else is extremely high risk.

This deal may not be great for UK but significantly better than no deal.

The Rees Mogg of this world are like the type of generals who urge their soldiers to fight to the death in a war in the name of national pride, while they are safely cooped up in their bunkers.
They will be insulated from the negative benefits of no deal.

cml387

The Labour attitude (at least it's leadership) is a eurosceptic as the ERG, except they hide it by making vague noises.

I would guess Corbyn's secret agenda is to have a hard Brexit, Tory chaos, GE, get into power and in the ensuing chaos implement a hard left agenda.

Thatnastyboy

joe40 wrote: »

The Rees Mogg of this world are like the type of generals who urge their soldiers to fight to the death in a war in the name of national pride, while they are safely cooped up in their bunkers.
They will be insulated from the negative benefits of no deal.

The Rees Mogg will be just fine with his hundreds of millions of wealth, not to mention the in-laws. Him and his likes will be very well insulated from any fallout no matter the deal/no deal.

It's the pie eating northerners et al that will be 'sent out as cannon fodder' (shoved further into poverty)

Wonder is the meat in a pie barm imported....

MrMusician18

Rhineshark wrote: »

Falls on the first hurdle - as literally any option bar Remain would.

Even remaining would fail the six tests.

RobMc59

Enzokk wrote: »

Here we have Bloomberg on deal.

Theresa May's Brexit Deal: What We Know So Far

According to the piece if after the transition the UK stays in the deal then they will contribute £10b per year to be part of the customs union and single market.

At least according to this article it seems the only compromise from the EU was to allow a all UK customs union but the UK has agreed to the NI backstop. The compromise of an all UK customs union is actually a positive for the EU as well.

The rest of the EU are`nt worried and obsessed that the UK will renege on a deal it only appears to be Ireland -and as in any negotiation there must realistically be compromise on both sides-what`s the difference?The UK are getting what they want and the EU will get an agreement that if the UK breaks will cost them dearly.

FrancieBrady

Didn't quite catch all he had to say.

Gregory Campbell on RTE sounding a note of maybe the DUP are having second thoughts, anyone? He seemed to criticise Sammy Wilson for speaking out of turn.

Leroy42

Sophie in ‘t Veld, a Dutch MEP who is the deputy to the European parliament’s chief spokesman, Guy Verhofstadt, told the Today programme this morning the “real problem” in the negotiation was in London. She went on:

The real problem doesn’t lie there. The real problem lies within the UK, within the government, within the Tory party, between the parties, because there has not been any agreement over the relationship with the EU between any of them over the last two years.

That is the real problem, because if the UK had a single agreed line, backed by the majority of parties and the majority of MPs, then the whole situation would not be so unclear.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/live/2018/nov/14/brexit-deal-theresa-may-conservatives-meet-decide-cabinet-politics-live

Sums it all up really. The EU rightly see that the main problem is that they are trying to negotiate with Olly Robbins, who then needs to negotiate with TM, who then needs to negotiate with her cabinet and then the Parliament. And they all have different views, different levels of information and different goals.

seamus

joe40 wrote: »

Thanks for that. So as far as I can see the only possible reason for Labour to reject this deal is to hope to then precipitate a general election. They then get into power (big question mark) and try to negotiate a closer customs union or reverse the process all together. I would imagine the EU would extend the process to facilitate this outcome, but again uncertain.

So what are labour up to? Surely if May can get this past her cabinet, with labour support it would pass Parliament and cut the feet from under the DUP. Anything else is extremely high risk.

Labour's problem is that they don't know what they want. The data says that Labour's vote base is strongly pro-Remain and always has been, but the leadership, Corbyn in particular, are euroskeptics favouring nationalisation and big government over the EU's preferred centrist structures.

Corbyn's dream would be a Britain out of the EU with a Labour government in charge. But the only way that can happen is if Labour take the reins after Britain leaves. If a GE is called and Labour just bull on with Brexit without considering a possible cancellation of the whole thing, they will be savaged.

Will Labour support May in parliament, rendering the DUP powerless? I don't know. If the DUP are sidelined now, then May has no government unless Labour support them in minority. Like FF do right now for FG, except that in UK politics such an arrangement is one of the four horsemen.

Basically bringing the DUP into this has turned the whole thing into a gigantic mess. Hindsight being 20:20, calling a second GE last year would have been a better option than turning to Arlene.

lawred2

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Didn't quite catch all he had to say.

Gregory Campbell on RTE sounding a note of maybe the DUP are having second thoughts, anyone? He seemed to criticise Sammy Wilson for speaking out of turn.

they must surely be well used to that

kowtow

So the review mechanism, apparently - and as I have alluded to here before - allows the UK to break off (and therefore out of the backstop) if they can show that the EU is not demonstrating good faith in negotiations to establish a suitable replacement for it.

It's always been the complaint of the Brexiteers - and I think not totally without merit - that alternative solutions have been dismissed out of hand by the Irish / EU side. This chimes with the suggestion that we have overplayed the border issue in an attempt to keep NI (or even UK) inside the CU .... whilst most here will deny this, the fact that alternative solutions are so often referred to in jest as "Unicorns" would suggest that the EU & Irish side haven't perhaps taken them as seriously as the UK would wish.

The review mechanism seeks to ensure that the Irish backstop only remains so long as negotiation going forward is in good faith on the part of the EU.

Having said that it's going to be very difficult, I think, for the UK to actually prove that the EU is not using best endeavors, regardless of whatever independent panel is established to adjudicate the issue.

RobMc59

kowtow wrote: »

So the review mechanism, apparently - and as I have alluded to here before - allows the UK to break off (and therefore out of the backstop) if they can show that the EU is not demonstrating good faith in negotiations to establish a suitable replacement for it.

It's always been the complaint of the Brexiteers - and I think not totally without merit - that alternative solutions have been dismissed out of hand by the Irish / EU side. This chimes with the suggestion that we have overplayed the border issue in an attempt to keep NI (or even UK) inside the CU .... whilst most here will deny this, the fact that alternative solutions are so often referred to in jest as "Unicorns" would suggest that the EU & Irish side haven't perhaps taken them as seriously as the UK would wish.

The review mechanism seeks to ensure that the Irish backstop only remains so long as negotiation going forward is in good faith on the part of the EU.

Having said that it's going to be very difficult, I think, for the UK to actually prove that the EU is not using best endeavors, regardless of whatever independent panel is established to adjudicate the issue.

Your assessment of the situation is balanced and sounds reasonable-I'd like to add that any deal that infuriates the DUP and the likes of Farage(where's my German passport!)and Rees Mogg can't be that bad for the EU can it!

Leroy42

What alternative solutions? Technology that doesn't exist? The reason they have been dismissed is that the UK were never able to provide any actual details of how it would work.

Remember TM performance at the committee when asked how tariffs on goods travelling through the EU to the UK would be dealt with or vice versa? She had no answer, she hadn't really thought it through.

The real tell in all of this is just how against a backstop the UK is. Why would they care if the solutions they propose are already ready to go? The reality is they know that signing up to a backstop, with the solutions currently available, means that it is permanent. "unless and until" something comes along, which of course they cannot even begin to work out.

Professor Moriarty

RobMc59 wrote: »

Your assessment of the situation is balanced and sounds reasonable-I'd like to add that any deal that infuriates the DUP and the likes of Farage(where's my German passport!)and Rees Mogg can't be that bad for the EU can it!

Yes, but any deal will infuriate the DUP, Farage and Mogg.

Leroy42

https://twitter.com/jessicaelgot/status/1062658242512412672?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1062658242512412672&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.theguardian.com%2Fpolitics%2Flive%2F2018%2Fnov%2F14%2Fbrexit-deal-theresa-may-conservatives-meet-decide-cabinet-politics-live

I have an issue with this. Staying in the EU is not on the table, so voting down a deal because it doesn't give an outcome that was never on the table seems crazy. MP's need to review this deal on the basis of whether it is the best they can achieve and whether it is better than the alternative (no deal).

kowtow

Leroy42 wrote: »

What alternative solutions? Technology that doesn't exist? The reason they have been dismissed is that the UK were never able to provide any actual details of how it would work.

Remember TM performance at the committee when asked how tariffs on goods travelling through the EU to the UK would be dealt with or vice versa? She had no answer, she hadn't really thought it through.

The real tell in all of this is just how against a backstop the UK is. Why would they care if the solutions they propose are already ready to go? The reality is they know that signing up to a backstop, with the solutions currently available, means that it is permanent. "unless and until" something comes along, which of course they cannot even begin to work out.

If your assessment is correct, and I am not disagreeing with you, then the EU & ourselves will have no difficulty in establishing that we have acted in good faith in trying to accommodate technical solutions - so the backstop will remain in place.

Fann Linn

What would happen if the UK govt fell today?Would a new general election become a remain/ brexit election or would the status quo remain?
Confused.

Leroy42

Fann Linn wrote: »

What would happen if the UK govt fell today?Would a new general election become a remain/ brexit election or would the status quo remain?
Confused.

I would imagine that the current deal would remain on the table from the EU POV, with only adjustments in the favor of the EU.

So in effect a GE would have to be run on the basis of this deal or a no deal. Of course you will plenty of people like JRM claiming that a much better deal is simply waiting to be negotiated but that is just another baseless Brexit claim.

Nody

kowtow wrote: »

It's always been the complaint of the Brexiteers - and I think not totally without merit - that alternative solutions have been dismissed out of hand by the Irish / EU side. This chimes with the suggestion that we have overplayed the border issue in an attempt to keep NI (or even UK) inside the CU .... whilst most here will deny this, the fact that alternative solutions are so often referred to in jest as "Unicorns" would suggest that the EU & Irish side haven't perhaps taken them as seriously as the UK would wish.

UK proposed electronical border to solve the issue; when challenged on showing such a border ANYWHERE in the world they failed to find it (or claimed that the USA/Canada, Norway/Sweden or Swiss border was working that way which were shown to be factually as far from the truth that they might as well start a unicorn farm as well) or pointing to the EU report saying "it might be technically possible in the future". They then commission their own report who comes to the same conclusion yet insist that it's possible anyway.

They then move on to the next solution which was the DMZ approach. The idea being that a zone of about 20km would be considered as border checking area rather than having it at the border. Beyond the fact on how to enforce this new "wide border", potential benefits etc. it still did not address the requirement of frictionless trade; it simply moved the border check around a bit.

Which lead to the third options of May's brexit proposal which not only was shot down by EU, her own parliament but included cheery picking and breaking pretty much every red line EU had set out from the start.

Hence sorry; the Brexiteers may feel EU has been unfair but the stark reality is every single proposal they have given have been shown to be factually impossible to implement and/or tap danced all over EU's red lines. To date there has not been a single workable proposal from Brexiteers on the Irish/NI border beyond "Feck em; we're breaking the peace deal we signed and going hard hog on a hard brexit".

Fann Linn

Leroy42 wrote: »

I would imagine that the current deal would remain on the table from the EU POV, with only adjustments in the favor of the EU.

So in effect a GE would have to be run on the basis of this deal or a no deal. Of course you will plenty of people like JRM claiming that a much better deal is simply waiting to be negotiated but that is just another baseless Brexit claim.

Thanks for that. That's what I actually thought myself. So the end result of the DUP pulling plant could ultimately result in a new GE in which the referendum would be replayed?
Strange days indeed.

flatty

Sterling falling like a rock in the past hour. I wonder what is going on.

ArmaniJeanss

MrMusician18 wrote: »

Even remaining would fail the six tests.

Not sure if you are being facetious or not?

Here's the 6 tests, I don't see how remaining would fail any of them.
It's arguable the only one that matters is the second one anyway - 1,4,5 are all subjective, 6 is really an internal matter for the UK whether inside the EU or not, 3 was already doable within the EU so no reason it can't be done outside.

Does it ensure a strong and collaborative future relationship with the EU?
Does it deliver the “exact same benefits” as we currently have as members of the Single Market and Customs Union?
Does it ensure the fair management of migration in the interests of the economy and communities?
Does it defend rights and protections and prevent a race to the bottom?
Does it protect national security and our capacity to tackle cross-border crime?
Does it deliver for all regions and nations of the UK?

Penn

Who determines whether or not the EU are acting in good faith though? And if say the UK decide the EU isn't acting in good faith, surely then it triggers a No Deal scenario and the UK have to put up a hard border?

This is just kicking the can down the road. There is no solution the UK could come up with until such a time as there's a change in government which isn't reliant on the DUP's deal and they can just vote to leave NI in the Customs Union and have the border in the sea. But the likelihood of either Labour or the Tories getting a clear majority in the next election seem to be fairly slim regardless, as the Tories are infighting (which a General Election or indeed May stepping down) would only exacerbate, and Corbyn is pro-Brexit even though most Labour supporters would be Remainers.

Inquitus

When would his be put to the commons?

Fann Linn

flatty wrote: »

Sterling falling like a rock in the past hour. I wonder what is going on.[/quote
Revolut.

Podge_irl

Penn wrote: »

Who determines whether or not the EU are acting in good faith though? And if say the UK decide the EU isn't acting in good faith, surely then it triggers a No Deal scenario and the UK have to put up a hard border?

The UK is a soverign country - it can decide to do that whenever and for whatever reason it wants. Those in charge do not actually want a "no deal" exit. If that were to change then no deal made no would matter.

Shelga

Can someone provide a summary of this deal? Does it take the UK out of the single market, is freedom of movement going to be ended? How does it differ from Chequers?

ArmaniJeanss

I read a hardcopy of the Express in the shop just to see the editorial.
They consider it an acceptable deal, they congratulate TMPM and suggest that its something that all MPs of all parties should accept and vote for.

Notwithstanding that the editor wouldn't have actually read the agreement at this stage, it does seem a curiously un-Express tack to take.
IMO basically indicating they just want out on any terms and aren't willing to risk a second referendum that might lead to remain.
And as a subtext it would indicate that ERG can't rely on their support when they claim what a bad deal it is.

I'm now inclined to think this will actually pass the HoC.

Rhineshark

Fann Linn wrote: »

flatty wrote: »

Sterling falling like a rock in the past hour. I wonder what is going on.

Revolut.

Both the question mark over today and Brexit and something to do with inflation not doing sonething it was expected to do.