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

McGiver

mickoneill31 wrote:

I'm happy enough to be part of the EU if the sh1t hits the fan. 9 of the 10 poorest regions in the EU are in the UK (one of those is NI) . Brexit is not going to improve that and likely to make them worse off.

Just to be correct that so that Brexiteers can't blame you for inaccuracy:

9 out of the poorest 10 regions in Western Europe are in the UK.

The poorest regions in the whole EU would be probably in Romania or Bulgaria.

Zubeneschamali

correct horse battery staple wrote: »

I dunno people who run business can not afford to ignore reality.

No Deal is so completely bonkers that business people have been assuming that since MPs are not actually mad, it won't happen.

Professor Moriarty

Russman wrote: »

Would this criteria be met by Joe Bloggs farmer who's land straddles the border and he's moving his livestock from field to field, potentially crossing the border several times ?

Nevermind Joe Bloggs. People who would like intimate detail on such matters such consult with Slab Murphy.

Russman

CelticRambler wrote: »

according to WTO rules, if the UK allows one cow or one litre of milk to be brought into NI from the EU without being checked, then every country in the world can send their cattle, beef and dairy products into the UK without any checks.

Would this criteria be met by Joe Bloggs farmer who's land straddles the border and he's moving his livestock from field to field, potentially crossing the border several times ?

McGiver

downcow wrote:

...never mind such an undemocratic conglomerate of 27 states.

Says someone from a four nation state which is unable to arrange its affairs in decentralised or federal arrangement for the satisfaction of all the constituent nations and regions, where almost all the matters are tightly controlled by the English government, where the other three nations have basically no say in those matters, where the upper house of the parliament is unelected with hereditary seats and seats allocated for clergy, where one third of lower house seats are "safe" with no possibility of electorate ever changing their party affiliation, where the constitution is not written anywhere but made up on the go...

Yeah sure the undemocratic EU. Please read up on how undemocratic the UK is and how the EU institutions work before talking this Daily Mail nonsense on this forum.

Professor Moriarty

boggerman1 wrote: »

When the big farmers in the north who would have been staunch dup voters up to now lose their single farm payments from end of march hopefully at the next election up north they will ditch the dup and consign them to history.up to 80% of ni farmers incomes comes from EU

It's happening already. DUP got 35% in 2017 GE. They're at 30% in the polls now.

J Mysterio

RobMc59 wrote: »

If the ira hadn't blew up the school bus Arlene Foster was on she probably would be a different person now and not the DUP leader-so it could be said that tactic was counter productive.

May have been her Father being killed which had the greater impact but thanks for your insightful contribution nonetheless.

keane2097

seamus wrote: »

A "managed" no deal is basically playing chicken. "The EU won't let us just crash out. So let's go with no deal and a pile of last-minute contingency arrangements will have to be put into place".

Is it theoretically possible? Well, yes. The EU could temporarily revert the competencies for various agreements, back to a local level. So Ireland could then enact emergency legislation that regulates the control of trade, flights, ships, etc between Ireland and the UK. With the understanding that six months later, everything reverts to EU rules and/or whatever new agreements have been made with the UK.

But of course, then every EU country has to do that. Ireland can't write legislation that controls the passage of flights through French airspace.

Which is chaos. And there's no carrot; no benefit to the EU of providing such an arrangement. The EU will enact its own emergency legislation to cover the union as a whole, but only insofar as it will protect EU interests. Again, there's no carrot for the EU to enact temporary emergency legislation to "save" the UK from its own fvck up.

The EU has stated pretty clearly that they're not going to kick this can down the road. They're not going to put temporary arrangements in place because the UK couldn't get its sh1t together.

What the EU puts in place to handle the world post-29th March, will be in place indefinitely.

This is it. They have the gun to their heads and are saying 'we will seriously pull the trigger so if you want to avoid being spattered with gore the only way to do so is give me everything I want'.

There seems to be a genuine incredulity on their part that we are willing to accept that we are going to get spattered in preference to giving them the unicorns they are demanding. This is despite the fact that we would have to saw off our arms to get the unicorns for them.

'I'd say we'll take the spatter there, Percy, sorry about that'.

Zubeneschamali

lawred2 wrote: »

What does a managed no deal mean anyway?

A whole slew of last minute/JIT bilateral agreements?

I think it was Davis who said they could leave with no deal and then negotiate a FTA during the transition period.

I think they believe that in the case of no deal and faced with chaos, the EU will offer a transition period during which nothing changes and these mini-deals can be done to keep planes flying, food on shelves and doctors and nurses in NHS hospitals.

Zubeneschamali

10000maniacs wrote: »

the hard Brexit contingencies & measures the government are now taking are in part meant as a clear message to the Irish government assist the UK to facilitate in relaxing the backstop. The Irish need to focus on what is important to them .

The backstop is important to us, which is why we have been focusing on it.

But thanks for the tip, anonymous member of Europe's most chaotic cabinet!

Seth Brundle

downcow wrote: »

I see no way out of this.

There is no way out of this that suits the pro-Brexit agenda.
The reality is that the best position financially for the UK is to remain. Anyone stating otherwise is lying.

downcow wrote: »

I don’t believe there is an example anywhere in the world of a nation giving up a permanent veto on how the border should be managed to another state

Some people in the UK want to walk away from a legally binding peace agreement. That's not the same as what you're stating above.
However, the Irish and British governments together agreed to protect the status in Northern Ireland in 2017. Now some of the British want to renege on that agreement. Why are you blaming both the Irish and EU for this?
As for the border, this is down to the UK simply because it is they who need to decide how they leave the EU. If they leave under TM's withdrawl agreement then there won't be an issue with the border. If they leave the EU without a deal (which will involve reneging on the 2017 agreement) then a border needs to be established by both sides to protect both sides markets. It is only the UK that can decide how they want to leave the EU at this point. The UK are not being kicked out, they chose to leave. It was not and is not an EU decision or even an EU preferred option.

downcow wrote: »

never mind such an undemocratic conglomerate of 27 states.

What is undemocratic about the EU that isn't undemocratic about the government and civil service in Ireland or the UK or France or wherever?
Surely the EU is more democratic than the UK given that each country has an equal voice whereas in the UK, England rules above all others?

Nody

lawred2 wrote: »

It is amazing to think that anyone in any sort of right mind would think that that was something the EU would be willing to facilitate...

But it's been UK's thought process from day 1; UK decides they want something and EU will give in to them because UK. You can look at any arguments raised by Brexiteers on deals to even some Remainers to the "parliament should have the right to amend the deal agreed with EU 27" etc.

boggerman1

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

The Ulster Farmers Union are terrified of a No Deal.

When the big farmers in the north who would have been staunch dup voters up to now lose their single farm payments from end of march hopefully at the next election up north they will ditch the dup and consign them to history.up to 80% of ni farmers incomes comes from EU

seamus

A "managed" no deal is basically playing chicken. "The EU won't let us just crash out. So let's go with no deal and a pile of last-minute contingency arrangements will have to be put into place".

Is it theoretically possible? Well, yes. The EU could temporarily revert the competencies for various agreements, back to a local level. So Ireland could then enact emergency legislation that regulates the control of trade, flights, ships, etc between Ireland and the UK. With the understanding that six months later, everything reverts to EU rules and/or whatever new agreements have been made with the UK.

But of course, then every EU country has to do that. Ireland can't write legislation that controls the passage of flights through French airspace.

Which is chaos. And there's no carrot; no benefit to the EU of providing such an arrangement. The EU will enact its own emergency legislation to cover the union as a whole, but only insofar as it will protect EU interests. Again, there's no carrot for the EU to enact temporary emergency legislation to "save" the UK from its own fvck up.

The EU has stated pretty clearly that they're not going to kick this can down the road. They're not going to put temporary arrangements in place because the UK couldn't get its sh1t together.

What the EU puts in place to handle the world post-29th March, will be in place indefinitely.

joe40

I would love to know the mindset of majority of HoC MPs if faced with a binary choice "May's Deal" or "No Deal".

I would imagine the majority would reluctantly accept May's deal in that scenario.

Therefore if the deal is voted down in January, do these MPs assume there will be another vote or a delay to article 50. Is there a chance they are playing a high stakes game of chicken, that they may lose.

it is becoming clear there are no further concessions from the EU and not much the Irish government can do unilaterally.

LeinsterDub

downcow wrote: »

I am being accused of not opening my eyes (and it may be a fair challenge to me) but ignoring the roi predicament by continually pointing out uks is shortsighted.
I was talking to a dairy farmer the other day who said 90% of their milk crosses the border to factories in roi to turn it into powder etc of which over 90% goes to gb. In no deal scenario what is obvious long term solution. Seems obvious to me that the factories will be moving. So this is not all one way traffic.

Yes they will move south to where 90% of their source materials come from.

listermint

lawred2 wrote: »

It is amazing to think that anyone in any sort of right mind would think that that was something the EU would be willing to facilitate...

Oh dont worry there are Tories who think they deserve to be treated with kid gloves and pandered on their way out.

They want the softest of landings and the EU to pad the ground for their chosen fall.

And in the same breath claim the EU as oppressors.

lawred2

Inquitus wrote: »

Pretty much, yes,

It is amazing to think that anyone in any sort of right mind would think that that was something the EU would be willing to facilitate...

Inquitus

lawred2 wrote: »

What does a managed no deal mean anyway?

A whole slew of last minute/JIT bilateral agreements?

Pretty much, yes,

lawred2

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

The EU have just dismissed any possibility of a "managed No Deal". Unicorn slaughtered.

What does a managed no deal mean anyway?

A whole slew of last minute/JIT bilateral agreements?

mickoneill31

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

The EU have just dismissed any possibility of a "managed No Deal". Unicorn slaughtered.

"Managed" No Deal reminded me of this video.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z1N2pm_Bhrc

The Leaver says we should have "No Deal" and when pressed by Dunt this actually means "No Deal" + lots of little side deals.

Professor Moriarty

The EU have just dismissed any possibility of a "managed No Deal". Unicorn slaughtered.

mickoneill31

10000maniacs wrote: »

On BBC Newsnight last night, their Brexit correspondent Nick Watt said he got from a cabinet source that the hard Brexit contingencies & measures the government are now taking are in part meant as a clear message to the Irish government assist the UK to facilitate in relaxing the backstop. The Irish need to focus on what is important to them as a hard Brexit would catastrophic to them as well.
If we have had any doubt that the BBC is a neutral observer, doubt no more. This is the BBC message as well.

The "cabinet source" could be anybody though. At the moment if you ask 2 members of the actual government over there the same question you get 3 different answers.

I listened to a talk by Sir Ivan Rogers where he was talking about how the UK is handling their negotiations. The UK is negotiating with a megaphone while primarily for their own population have been watched by the EU and used to the EUs advantage. It's mental stuff that some cabinet members think that threatening anybody is going to get them to bend to your will. It has precisely the opposite affect.

prawnsambo

RobMc59 wrote: »

I haven't been able to have a look at eu no deal plans yet-does it include maritime exclusion zones?

Yes. Here: https://ec.europa.eu/info/sites/info/files/file_import/fisheries_and_aquaculture_en.pdf

breatheme

downcow wrote: »

Fair enough. But does anyone on here believe it is all about finances and that identity does not come into it at all

How does May's agreement as it currently stands threaten your identity?

How does having checks in the Irish sea for goods coming from GB into NI (and not the other way around, I may add) threaten your identity?

How does having to return a container carrying merchandise deemed not suitable threaten your identity?

Have you actually read the agreement?

10000maniacs

On BBC Newsnight last night, their Brexit correspondent Nick Watt said he got from a cabinet source that the hard Brexit contingencies & measures the government are now taking are in part meant as a clear message to the Irish government assist the UK to facilitate in relaxing the backstop. The Irish need to focus on what is important to them as a hard Brexit would catastrophic to them as well.
If we have had any doubt that the BBC is a neutral observer, doubt no more. This is the BBC message as well.

RobMc59

prawnsambo wrote: »

It really depends on how hard a crash out the UK chooses. Full on hard brexit will cause huge problems in NI. For example, the deal that maintains the electricity interconnecter dies. Even with a soft brexit, this is something that hasn't even been addressed yet. The first line in section 3 of Article 50 says "The treaties shall cease to apply".

But the worst aspect of this is that the UK has not been seriously preparing for brexit. The EU has. Have you looked at the EU preparedness notices? It's sobering reading. But wrt Irish freight to and from the continent, that route has already been set up and two of the biggest Ro-Ro ferries in the world are tasked for it.

I haven't been able to have a look at eu no deal plans yet-does it include maritime exclusion zones?

Grab All Association

SNIP. NO more nonsense please.

Christy42

downcow wrote: »

Christy42 wrote: »

.....Both sides say they don't want it at the ni border.....

.....The UK has provided a backstop that will turn into a hard border in a few years time despite their claims of not wanting KT.

So which is it?
I think we all know that the UK would like a conversation about what might be possible at the Irish border but ireland will not let the discussion even start. So when this goes pairshaped for UK and ireland remember that a very small compromise from ireland could have got this current deal over the line.

The UK want to kick the can down the line and deal with it at another time. Hence the temporary backstop. However a temporary backstop is not a real solution and will turn into a hard border when the time limit is reached. The UK don't want a hard border and are trying to delay. Since they won't come up with new solutions and won't accept EU solutions it will come about even if the UK doesn't want it.

Ireland will sit down if the UK has a potential long term solution. The UK has no solutions. We do. I see little reason to discuss much until there is a second possible solution. Till then take ours.

A hard border (now or delayed) is not a small compromise. It is entire abandonment of people on the border. The UK and DUP are happy to ditch them in it. We are not.

Professor Moriarty

Water John wrote: »

£30,000 income was the threshold for immigrants yesterday. They have already rowed back on it this morning. They really haven't the foggiest notion where they are going and where they will end up with No Deal.

There was a good discussion on Newsnight about this last night. Essentially, the point was made that immigration continues to be a driving force behind Brexit. However, the waterbed effect is beginning to kick in. So, as they reduce immigration from EU countries decreases, immigration from non-EU countries will increase. Thus rendering Britain "less white" as Emily Maitlis pointed out - which won't go down at all well with many Leave voters.