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 VI

johnnyskeleton

Hi folks, as Theresa May has won the vote of no confidence and we are heading into Brexit day early next year, I thought for the new thread people might give their summary of their views on Brexit to date before we get into the more day to day discussions.

So what do you think about what has happened so far? Who has come off well, who has come off badly?

Where do you think Brexit is going? What is going to be the likely impact on Ireland, Northern Ireland, the rest of the U.K. and the E.U. respectively?

Both this thread and the Mark V thread will remain open simultaneously for the next day or so and Mark V will be closed as it gets closer to the server busting 10,000 mark. Hopefully we can set down a solid foundation now for a top quality thread to come!

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

Bit cynical

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

The answer to this was and continues to be (and will continue to be) that, if faced with the following choices:

A) A negotiated settlement that compromises SM integrity and the working operation of the GFA

B1) No Deal with a consequent imposition of a Hard Border
B2) Clear violations of GFA commitments on the part of the UK
B3) Economic hardships in the UK as a consequence of a disorderly exit

Then we take the second choice. Because it creates a possibility in the short to medium term of recovering the current situation. If we negotiate away the current situation then it is gone forever and, worse, we agreed to it.

However what the EU is saying to one of its departing members is that leaving the customs union is unacceptable to the EU and no further negotiations are possible since leaving the customs union can't be done without leaving a hard border (or splitting the country in some way that moves the customs border within the state).

On the face of it - I think most people would agree - this position is not reasonable. It is not consistent with the principle that member states are free to leave the EU and its institutions.

It only seems reasonable to us in Ireland because we very much want to avoid a hard border. But us wanting something strongly does not make it reasonable at the EU level.

If the result is a hard border in Ireland as a result of no deal, then from the EU's perspective, so be it. It is a lesson to other prospective leaving states: "we will find some stumbling block for you to trip over". But the EU as a whole will not suffer much, therefore they can adopt a hardline, inflexible approach. Ireland will face hardship of similar magnitude to the UK, but from the EU's perspective, Ireland is a tiny fraction of the EUs population and economy.

Why is Ireland going along with it? Because politically it is very hard to back down from the earlier posistion when it was believed that the UK would do anything for a deal. The only leverage Ireland has with the EU is that it is threatening not to enforce border infrastructure in the event of no deal.

Professor Moriarty

Nody wrote: »

It is not about people wanting to crash out; the crash out is the default option unless they:

a) Vote to approve the deal on the table
or
b) Vote to have a new referendum

If the parliament don't do one of those two items then UK will crash out no matter if they don't want to or not. That's the problem here and why my money is still on accidental crash out which I've stated over a year now.

Article 50 can be deferred. There is also the possibility of a GE fought on softer v harder Brexit.

Nody

Water John wrote: »

I won't go arguing it, but only about 50 MPs favour a Crash out Brexit, less than 10%. Most MPs know it would be an economic and social disaster.

It might not be Corbyn. There would be further discussion, much probably already has taken place, on who should move the vote, so as to take the partisan bias out of it.

It is not about people wanting to crash out; the crash out is the default option unless they:

a) Vote to approve the deal on the table
or
b) Vote to have a new referendum

If the parliament don't do one of those two items then UK will crash out no matter if they don't want to or not. That's the problem here and why my money is still on accidental crash out which I've stated over a year now.

josip

Bit cynical wrote: »

I don't think we have really been given support it is just that Ireland's interests to avoid a hard border coincided with the EU's desire to make brexit difficult for the UK. The problem is that making brexit difficult for the UK may have an outcome that Ireland does not want.

The EU aren't making brexit difficult, the UK are making brexit difficult.
Their choice, not ours.

Professor Moriarty

Leroy42 wrote: »

I just cannot see this happening. Labour as are divided as the Tories on this (just not as toxic). So whilst the majority may not what a no deal, as pointed out above it is not as simple as voting against it. They must propose an actual way out of it.

And if we have learned anything from Brexit is that people tend not to have any coherent plans, just whatever is right in front of them.

Are the Tory MP's going to essentially vote no confidence in the government, thus likely costing themselves seats far earlier than 2022?
Can Corbyn really do such an about turn as to now want remain?

Clock is ticking and time is against all the options except for No Deal

But where is the equivalent of the ERG/DUP in Lab/Lib/SNP ranks? There is no appetite for No Deal on opposition benches.

Leroy42

Water John wrote: »

I won't go arguing it, but only about 50 MPs favour a Crash out Brexit, less than 10%. Most MPs know it would be an economic and social disaster.

It might not be Corbyn. There would be further discussion, much probably already has taken place, on who should move the vote, so as to take the partisan bias out of it.

I just cannot see this happening. Labour as are divided as the Tories on this (just not as toxic). So whilst the majority may not what a no deal, as pointed out above it is not as simple as voting against it. They must propose an actual way out of it.

And if we have learned anything from Brexit is that people tend not to have any coherent plans, just whatever is right in front of them.

Are the Tory MP's going to essentially vote no confidence in the government, thus likely costing themselves seats far earlier than 2022?
Can Corbyn really do such an about turn as to now want remain?

Clock is ticking and time is against all the options except for No Deal

seamus

^^^^

I guess the problem as everyone sees it, is that avoiding a crash-out requires action. It requires unity of some description, it will require a vote in the HoC for a way forward that a majority of the house agree on.

And at this moment in time it seems that majority agreement on any way forward is a long way away. It's all well and good to say that 90% of the house agree that no deal is the worst thing, but unless you can get them to agree on something else, then no deal is inevitable.

At the moment, Rome is burning and there are four Neros, all fiddling to their own tunes.

Water John

I won't go arguing it, but only about 50 MPs favour a Crash out Brexit, less than 10%. Most MPs know it would be an economic and social disaster.

It might not be Corbyn. There would be further discussion, much probably already has taken place, on who should move the vote, so as to take the partisan bias out of it.

hill16bhoy

Water John wrote: »

Parliament won't allow a Crash out Brexit. May's Deal gets defeated. LB move a no confidence and lose that. Then we move to a situation where a majority of MPs are in favour of a 2nd Ref. That requires an extension to Art 50.
Main decision is, what is on the ballot paper.

What is the process for deciding to hold a second referendum?

I presume it would be a parliamentary motion?

Who brings it? Somebody from Labour, presumably? And surely it would have to be accompanied by a simultaneous motion to extend Article 50?

Would it be against Corbyn's wishes?

How many Tories would have to "defect" for such a motion to be approved?

If it's approved, but May or whoever is Prime Minister is personally against it, are they then entirely bound by such a motion/s being passed, ie. would parliament as a whole effectively be "the government", not the government itself?

Leroy42

No deal crash out is the default.

When people claim that the HoC won't allow it, it is only partially in their gift. They would not only need to vote against the no deal, but then vote in something that the EU will accept. Either accept the deal or extend/cancel A50.

There is very little evidence to suggest that HoC is willing to do either or those.

So despite the HoC claiming they won't allow a No Deal, come 30th March that is exactly what will happen.

Christy42

Bit cynical wrote: »

Tell me how wrote: »

I do have a small, sneaky feeling in the back of my mind that at some point in the future, we in Ireland will be in a situation where we are being told we are expected to pay for the support which Ireland was given by Europe at this time.

I don't think we have really been given support it is just that Ireland's interests to avoid a hard border coincided with the EU's desire to make brexit difficult for the UK. The problem is that making brexit difficult for the UK may have an outcome that Ireland does not want.

The EU have tried. Short of sending them state aid like a 3rd world country (or intentionally side the trade deal towards the UK like some do in lieu of state aid) they could not be more accommodating. The EU wanted a soft border because well, it is in the interest of EU citizens (Irish) to not have it and it is no skin off the rest of them.

I would agree that the EU will not be with Ireland through everything. Everyone has their own interests in the club. No other country will ever be totally with Ireland through everything. All we, or any other country, can do is make deals with countries whose interests align with your own. That means the EU.

LuckyLloyd

Bit cynical wrote: »

I don't think we have really been given support it is just that Ireland's interests to avoid a hard border coincided with the EU's desire to make brexit difficult for the UK. The problem is that making brexit difficult for the UK may have an outcome that Ireland does not want.

The answer to this was and continues to be (and will continue to be) that, if faced with the following choices:

A) A negotiated settlement that compromises SM integrity and the working operation of the GFA

B1) No Deal with a consequent imposition of a Hard Border
B2) Clear violations of GFA commitments on the part of the UK
B3) Economic hardships in the UK as a consequence of a disorderly exit

Then we take the second choice. Because it creates a possibility in the short to medium term of recovering the current situation. If we negotiate away the current situation then it is gone forever and, worse, we agreed to it.

Blowfish

As I see it there are only the 3 options left, remain, May's deal and No Deal. The best thing that I can think of for May is to create a 'shit or get off the pot' moment in parliament between those 3 options.

She'd need to be completely up front and obvious ahead of time about what she is doing and that each MP will have to justify their choices to their constituents when she does the following:

Put forward legislation that states something along the lines of 'if there is no agreement between EU & UK by Jan 21st, the UK will withdraw Article 50. The result of this will then be the 'default' option depending on the second proposal.

Put forward her deal for a vote. It'll then be a choice between her deal and whatever parliament chose above.

It would be far from perfect for anyone, but forcing Parliament to actually chose something is about the only thing she can do.

Water John

Parliament won't allow a Crash out Brexit. May's Deal gets defeated. LB move a no confidence and lose that. Then we move to a situation where a majority of MPs are in favour of a 2nd Ref. That requires an extension to Art 50.
Main decision is, what is on the ballot paper.

FrancieBrady

briany wrote: »

Somebody on Question Time mentioned a Citizen's Jury deciding whether to revoke A50. Interesting idea. At least it's a change from the circular arguments going on.

Caroline Lucas of The Green Party I think.

LeinsterDub

Bit cynical wrote: »

I don't think we have really been given support it is just that Ireland's interests to avoid a hard border coincided with the EU's desire to make brexit difficult for the UK. The problem is that making brexit difficult for the UK may have an outcome that Ireland does not want.

Yeah because it the EU that is acting like children in the HoC.

Tell me how

Bit cynical wrote: »

I don't think we have really been given support it is just that Ireland's interests to avoid a hard border coincided with the EU's desire to make brexit difficult for the UK. The problem is that making brexit difficult for the UK may have an outcome that Ireland does not want.

Username fits the bill.:pac:

briany

Leroy42 wrote: »

I see TM and Juncker had a bit of a spat at the parliament today. Channel 5 have 'hired' some 'expert lip readers' to work out what was said.

it appears that TM is annoyed that Juncker called her nebulous.

To me, this goes to the very heart of the problem. He called he position nebulous, but even if he did say it about her, she is supposed to be above this playground stuff. She is supposed to be working on getting a renegotiation but appears to be more worried about how she is perceived.

Stop messing about and get on with the real work.

The only bit of real work left, that we know of, is for May to take her deal back to the Commons where it will be shot to bits like a clay pigeon.

What happens after that is anybody's guess.

Will there be a second referendum? Hard to say. It certainly won't be on the current timescale, anyway. I presume that it would need to be OK'd by parliament. Also, somebody mentioned a clause in the Great Repeal act which said the UK would stop observing current EU treaties on 30th March, so if that's true then that would probably need changing, too. Basically, it would potentially require a lot more arguing when there just isn't the time.

Somebody on Question Time mentioned a Citizen's Jury deciding whether to revoke A50. Interesting idea. At least it's a change from the circular arguments going on.

At this point, my money would be on May having no choice but to put the deal to a vote, and when it gets crushed, she'll resign the next day. Some Karl Donitz type figure will lead the UK into a no-deal exit, while the ERG clink champagne glasses in the background.

Bit cynical

Tell me how wrote: »

I do have a small, sneaky feeling in the back of my mind that at some point in the future, we in Ireland will be in a situation where we are being told we are expected to pay for the support which Ireland was given by Europe at this time.

I don't think we have really been given support it is just that Ireland's interests to avoid a hard border coincided with the EU's desire to make brexit difficult for the UK. The problem is that making brexit difficult for the UK may have an outcome that Ireland does not want.

Professor Moriarty

josip wrote: »

I think we have to accept at this stage that the UK will crash out on the 29th, will stay out and move further away.
The British I know who are educated enough to stop this, simply repeat, "Oh, the politicians will work something out", any time I ask them about their plans.
The remaining British who are not able to inform themselves, will read the Express headline, never read the full article or watch the full clip, and will remain in cloud cuckoo land.
I no longer have any hope.

The Express has all the gravitas of the Beano.

josip

ilovesmybrick wrote: »

Yet if you look at the Express the headline is

I didn't see much rage there, just pure bemusement!

I think we have to accept at this stage that the UK will crash out on the 29th, will stay out and move further away.
The British I know who are educated enough to stop this, simply repeat, "Oh, the politicians will work something out", any time I ask them about their plans.
The remaining British who are not able to inform themselves, will read the Express headline, never read the full article or watch the full clip, and will remain in cloud cuckoo land.
I no longer have any hope.

Leroy42

I see TM and Juncker had a bit of a spat at the parliament today. Channel 5 have 'hired' some 'expert lip readers' to work out what was said.

it appears that TM is annoyed that Juncker called her nebulous.

To me, this goes to the very heart of the problem. He called he position nebulous, but even if he did say it about her, she is supposed to be above this playground stuff. She is supposed to be working on getting a renegotiation but appears to be more worried about how she is perceived.

Stop messing about and get on with the real work.

Tell me how

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

The BBC has become the mouthpiece of the establishment which means not criticising the new boss or any future boss which is also why Jeremy Corbyn gets such an easy ride. I'm not sure how much better Channel 4 are either when Barry Gardiner has been repeatedly allowed to spout mistruths about renegotiating with the EU.

Watching Twitter during QT last night there were posts calling it both Tory propaganda and Remain advertisers.

Think a political media can consider itself as doing a good job when both sides hate them.

Personally, I do feel the personal leanings of their staff seeps through from time to time.

Same could be said of C4 to some degree where most seem to be of the remain persuasion.

Shelga

Do people like Davis genuinely think the EU is going to backtrack at the very last minute? Why would they?

The UK has a hell of a lot more to lose than the EU, in the event of a no deal. What a colossal risk to take, when it's now clear that it's a bluff anyway.

ilovesmybrick

Tell me how wrote: »

Came here to post that.

EU are fast running out of patience. Irrespective of what happens May, a different deal WILL NOT be negotiated.

Choice between No Deal/2nd Referendum is all that's left now it looks like.

Yet if you look at the Express the headline is

Luxembourg Prime Minister RAGES about no-deal – 'Brexit was YOUR idea, not mine!

I didn't see much rage there, just pure bemusement!

Tell me how

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

It's all quite humiliating isn't it?

Came here to post that.

EU are fast running out of patience. Irrespective of what happens May, a different deal WILL NOT be negotiated.

Choice between No Deal/2nd Referendum is all that's left now it looks like.

ilovesmybrick

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

https://twitter.com/brehonisbest/status/1073491717570117634

It's all quite humiliating isn't it?

It's actually kind of worth watching the full video here https://luxtimes.lu/european-union/35921-brexit-is-your-choice-not-mine-says-bettel

Kermit.de.frog

https://twitter.com/brehonisbest/status/1073491717570117634

It's all quite humiliating isn't it?

cml387

The advantages of having David Davis on is that he appears normal (until he opens his mouth of course).
Some of the Brexiteers seem human, but some expression or sideways glance or turn of phrase gives them away and then their alien origins are clear.

Nobody can convince me that Jacob Rees Mogg wasn't assembled on some distant planet from a set of "English Toff" blueprints.

ancapailldorcha

Shelga wrote: »

Why is David Davis still invited on to programmes like Question Time? Caroline Lucas was visibly angry when telling him he was playing fast and loose with people's lives. Blithely saying that leaving without a deal will be fine.

This is the man who thinks there is a transition period with no deal. Why on earth does no one call him out on this absolute bullshit? JLR and other companies have said they will have no choice but to leave the UK if there is no deal. Manufacturing will be utterly decimated.

I honestly don't know how someone in the audience didn't go for him. He is despicable, as is the BBC for indulging his dangerous lies.

The BBC has become the mouthpiece of the establishment which means not criticising the new boss or any future boss which is also why Jeremy Corbyn gets such an easy ride. I'm not sure how much better Channel 4 are either when Barry Gardiner has been repeatedly allowed to spout mistruths about renegotiating with the EU.