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

prawnsambo

Folkstonian wrote: »

You realise, I presume, that channel 4 news are extremely pro-remain, and they ask these absurd leading questions to set up metaphorical half-volleys for EU officials to express views about Brexit and British politics that fit very nicely with their editorial position?

Well yes. It's lowest common denominator questioning. In order to represent the viewers, they ask the obvious questions and then drill down a bit to get a bit more depth. But at least C4 are not as obviously pandering to their interviewees as the BBC are. It's pathetic listening to the lies being swallowed whole by them. Like Esther McVey with her no-deal transition period. Just allowed spout that crap unchallenged.

Christy42

It has to be pointed out that the UK would be free under WTO rules to not set up a border in Ireland.

However unless they set up checks for goods coming into the UK they would be forced to charge 0% tariffs on all goods from every nation in the world (as they are not charging tariffs to the EU from this border without a free trade agreement in place).

Note that the UK would be required to make a fair go of this. Though obviously complete success from either side would not be required given the impossibility of policing that border.

If they attempted to circumnavigate even WTO rules they would be left with little recourse when other nations did not follow WTO rules with them and could charge whatever tariffs to the UK specifically while sneaking goods into the UK through Ireland and just paying EU tariffs. Either way would obviously cripple the UK beyond even a no deal Brexit so they will put up a border for goods at a minimum in the case of a no deal.

Imreoir2

Here is my read on the situation.

Since the deal was agreed, there has only been three possible outcomes, The Deal, No-Deal or Cancel Brexit. Any other step, such as an election or a referendum is only a step leading to one of these three outcomes.

Only a few impotent backbenchers are supprting a no-deal outcome at this point, and I think there is an ongoing campaing by government to discredit them in every way possible. The farce with the 80 trucks parked in a disused airport last week only makes sense if seen as a deliberate atempt to show the governments no-deal prep as being woefully inept. TM has also been signaling that no-deal has been abandoned by Government as an option. When was the last time you heard her say "no-deal is better than a bad deal"? Her comments today that no-deal would put the Union at risk is the clearest signal yet that no-deal is firmly off the table.

That leaves take the deal or cancel Brexit. Parliament will answer that question tomorrow.

When the deal is rejected, Labour will call for an election and will put down a motion of no-confidence, but I think May will continue doing the only thing she has proven to be good at, clinging to power.

The vote tomorrow could well be so decisive that TM feels free to start talking about pulling the plug on Brexit openly. It may take an A50 extension, an election or even a referendum to get there, but if the vote tomorrow is as decisive as it now seems it will be, then I think Brexit is dead.

Tell me how

Imreoir2 wrote: »

The vote tomorrow could well be so decisive that TM feels free to start talking about pulling the plug on Brexit openly. It may take an A50 extension, an election or even a referendum to get there, but if the vote tomorrow is as decisive as it now seems it will be, then I think Brexit is dead.

The vote tomorrow is at least partially so decisive because many think the deal is not Brexity enough. There is a way to go in this whole saga yet.

Imreoir2

Tell me how wrote: »

The vote tomorrow is at least partially so decisive because many think the deal is not Brexity enough. There is a way to go in this whole saga yet.

Sure, and yet there are only two possible alternatives to the deal, no-deal or no Brexit. given those choices no Brexit will win. There is a long way to go, but really only one credible outcome at this stage.

Tell me how

Imreoir2 wrote: »

Sure, and yet there are only two possible alternatives to the deal, no-deal or no Brexit. given those choices no Brexit will win.

There will be a 2nd referendum before there is no Brexit. And if there is a 2nd referendum, I wouldn't bet on the outcome.

If the Brexiteers think they are going to lose their Brexit, they will call for that 2nd referendum whereas now they don't want it because they think they'll get out without it.

CelticRambler

RobMc59 wrote: »

Why would anyone want to go back to the bad times?
Whether it`s popular to say it or not there is a unique,special relationship between Britain and Ireland which does`nt exist with any other nations.

It's not at all unpopular to say it! Always tacitly understood, that "special relationship" was formally acknowledged by a mutual decision to let bygones be bygones, with the signing of the GFA. Since then, the GB-Ireland relationship has become even stronger, to the point where the RoI has become a fairly regular holiday destination for the Royal Family. The circumstances enabling that improved situation were recognised by 27 member states of the EU as something worth protecting, but alas not by the one member that has benefited most.

PropJoe10

Haven't really been following this over the past few days, but it seems that May's deal doesn't have much chance tomorrow. It seems that the UK is on the verge of anarchy at this stage - my take on it is that they'll eventually decide that they're deadlocked in the Commons and refer May's deal back to the public in a new referendum. It seems to me like the EU aren't going to bend any further, and a "no deal" is now off the table, so what exactly is the alternative?

CelticRambler

Tell me how wrote: »

There will be a 2nd referendum before there is no Brexit. And if there is a 2nd referendum, I wouldn't bet on the outcome.

If the Brexiteers think they are going to lose their Brexit, they will call for that 2nd referendum whereas now they don't want it because they think they'll get out without it.

I'd be more inclined to go with Imreoir2's reading of the tea-leaves. Should the WA be approved tomorrow, that would oust Trump In and UK Out from their top spots as the most unexpected votes of this decade :P so yes, we're now at the point of "No Deal" or "No Brexit". Even though "No Deal" is the default outcome of faffing around for another ten weeks, thanks to the SNP's ECJ judgement, No Brexit is on the table as an option, and it's actually the path of least resistance - a simple majority of MPs voting to instruct Theresa May to write the letter and deliver it to Brussels.

Yes, I can see how the Brexiteers - so vehemently against a second referendum - might suddenly suffer an epidemic of turncoatism and start agitating for a second referendum, as it would be a handy way to run down the clock; but they know, too, that their campaign lies have been exposed, and that rather too much of "Project Fear" has already happened for real, and there's a high chance that "the will of the people" will be shown to have evolved.

If they know they're going to be bullied into staying in the EU (by their fellow citizens taking back control :rolleyes: ), it'll be better for them to continue the fight on the grounds that weak-minded, lily-livered MPs refused to respect the will of people, and they stand firm as the guardians of democracy [2016 UK edition].

rusty the athlete

So desperate are they now that a defeat this evening of less than 100 votes will now be considered a victory, >100 but < 200 a sort of draw, and anything over 200 a loss. Funny old game UK politics. A 'win' implies she can run backwards and forwards to Brussels, fine tune the bill and then repeatedly represent it until MPs until it is passed, although I believe Erskin May's Parliamentary Practice specifically forbids the repeated submission of a tweaked motion in this way. However May has successfully defied procedure and practice several times and will probably choose to ignore this convention as well.

DOCARCH

rusty the athlete wrote: »

....fine tune the bill and then repeatedly represent it until MPs until it is passed....

Not sure Bercow will allow/tolerate that!

Peregrinus

rusty the athlete wrote: »

So desperate are they now that a defeat this evening of less than 100 votes will now be considered a victory, >100 but < 200 a sort of draw, and anything over 200 a loss. Funny old game UK politics. A 'win' implies she can run backwards and forwards to Brussels, fine tune the bill and then repeatedly represent it until MPs until it is passed, although I believe Erskin May's Parliamentary Practice specifically forbids the repeated submission of a tweaked motion in this way. However May has successfully defied procedure and practice several times and will probably choose to ignore this convention as well.

DOCARCH wrote: »

Not sure Bercow will allow/tolerate that!

Nerdy nitpick: this isn't a Bill, it's a motion. And, yes, there is a rule that prevents the same motion being moved twice in the same session of Parliament and, yes, it's up to Bercow whether to enforce that rule or make exceptions to it. But he leans towards allowing Parliament to consider matters and have a say on them and, especially with the clown car of state heading straight for the cliffs of no-deal Brexit, I would expect him to give Parliament every opportunity to consider anything that might avert that.

Enzokk

The maneuvering and games has started ahead of the vote later tonight. Hilary Benn has withdrawn his amendment and it will not be voted on as the feeling is it will increase the loss for May if it is not in the agreement.

Labour is waiting to see how big the defeat is this evening before pulling the trigger on a motion of no confidence in the government.

https://twitter.com/RaynerSkyNews/status/1085061414417588224

morgana

More maneuvering : a German news station (ntv) reports that according to the Sun (sic) Merkel has allegedly offered support to TM after the vote is not passed tonight. Including trying persuade Leo to agree to time limited backstop.

lawred2

morgana wrote: »

More maneuvering : a German news station (ntv) reports that according to the Sun (sic) Merkel has allegedly offered support to TM after the vote is not passed tonight. Including trying persuade Leo to agree to time limited backstop.

A German station is reporting on something the Sun is claiming..

I'd say we can sit on that for a while

Calina

morgana wrote: »

More maneuvering : a German news station (ntv) reports that according to the Sun (sic) Merkel has allegedly offered support to TM after the vote is not passed tonight. Including trying persuade Leo to agree to time limited backstop.

well if ntv need to reference the Sun for news about what Merkel is thinking we can safely assume ntv's sources in Germany need improving.

Skelet0n

AdamD wrote: »

funkey_monkey wrote: »

No, it was Sophie in ‘t Veld

(Go to 27:40):

The guy questioning her is beyond dim, its just worrying.

There was an interview on Sky News with Ska Keller when TM was looking for assurances. She’s very well spoken, I wonder if you can figure out which way the interviewer voted.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wzk_wd-Bpwk&feature=youtu.be

Hurrache

morgana wrote: »

More maneuvering : a German news station (ntv) reports that according to the Sun (sic) Merkel has allegedly offered support to TM after the vote is not passed tonight. Including trying persuade Leo to agree to time limited backstop.

I somehow doubt Merkel has taken such a 180.

EKRIUQ

Skelet0n wrote: »

There was an interview on Sky News with Ska Keller when TM was looking for assurances. She’s very well spoken, I wonder if you can figure out which way the interviewer voted.
[link]https://youtu.be/Wzk_wd-Bpwk[/link]

Yes but that's Adam the Irish should "get over themselves" boulton he's always been very anti EU and Ireland.

seamus

morgana wrote: »

More maneuvering : a German news station (ntv) reports that according to the Sun (sic) Merkel has allegedly offered support to TM after the vote is not passed tonight. Including trying persuade Leo to agree to time limited backstop.

A time limited backstop is no backstop at all.

This is the core ignorance of Brexiteers. Maybe wilful. A backstop is a failsafe. It's the emergency braking system in a lift shaft. It doesn't retract after 30 minutes, it stays there permanently until the emergency crews rescue everyone.

A limited backstop is an oxymoron.

And the EU will not go with it. If they pressure Ireland into going soft on the border, they may as well start dismantling the EU.

It's not going to happen.

robinph

There is too much deliberate misunderstanding of pretty much everything to do with Brexit, and the media is letting them away with it and repeating their misinterpretations in order to confuse the population. The backstop is quite simple to avoid or get out of if it does kick in, just come up with another plan that doesn't require the backstop.

EdgeCase

DOCARCH wrote: »

Not sure Bercow will allow/tolerate that!

I don't think any speaker would. It breeches at the very least parliamentary conventions, if not rules.

Hurrache wrote: »

I somehow doubt Merkel has taken such a 180.

Merkel doesn't do major changes of direction like that. She's anything but fickle. There'll be a long-term, sane strategy behind absolutely everything she does. She's generally the polar opposite to the kind of politics that's going on in he UK at the moment.

In general, I just do not believe anything printed in the UK tabloids on topics like this. They will just take rumours and draw ridiculous conclusions.

Also, Leo can't time limit the backstop as it's entirely bound up in the protection of the Good Friday Agreement, which is a very solid bilateral agreement which was signed by both the UK and Ireland and has been basically endorsed by referenda in Northern Ireland and the Republic as well as all parties on this island pretty much with the exception of the DUP.

Making life easier for the Tories is hardly worth torching about 3 decades worth of painstaking peace building and to resolve a conflict that literally cost thousands of lives. Perspective is everything!

If someone is going to wreck the Good Friday Agreement, it is not going to be the Irish Government or the EU for that matter either. I think the EU, and particularly Barnier, appreciates just how delicate that situation is.

I also get the impression that the Germans are putting the stability of Europe ahead of economic concerns and also have a very strong understanding of what this kind of border politics can do to a country, based on their own post war history.

Absolutely all of these problems were predicted and explained ad nauseam by everyone who knew anything about the Northern Ireland political problems and conflict resolution. The UK (or should I say English) commentariat chose to flatly ignore them as if they were simple little things that could be resolved at the stroke of a pen.

Northern Ireland, despite what they seem to think, is their problem. It's part of the United Kingdom and it's been one of the most complicated and dangerous conflicts in post war Europe, even if they like to pretend that it's an Irish problem and nothing do with them.

However, there's probably no point in even posting this stuff anymore. The UK political community seem to be locked into utter arrogance on the topic and simply do not care. So, really we're talking to a brick wall.

I'm at the stage on Brexit that I just don't care anymore. If they want to jump off a cliff : go for it!

igCorcaigh

From the Guardian:

Quick guide
Commons Brexit vote – the day's timetable

11.30am The Commons begins sitting. The first item is questions to Matt Hancock, the health secretary, and his ministerial team. These are meant to last 30 minutes but can run slightly over. Then the Labour MP Debbie Abrahams briefly introduces a private member’s bill on public sector supply chains under a 10-minute rule motion.

After midday If there are no urgent questions or ministerial statements to delay proceedings, the final day of debate on Theresa May’s Brexit deal – officially known as section 13(1)(b) of the European Union (Withdrawal) Act 2018 – begins. It will be opened for the government by the attorney general, Geoffrey Cox.

Before 7pm May will make a final closing speech for the government, appealing for support for her deal.

From 7pm Voting begins. However, before the crucial vote, MPs must vote on some of the dozen or so amendments tabled by Labour, the Lib Dems and SNP as well as backbenchers including Labour’s Hilary Benn and the Tory MP Andrew Murrison. It remains unclear how many of these will be put to a division. One amendment, tabled by the Tory Hugo Swire, has been accepted by the government.

At some point between around 7.30pm to 9.30pm MPs finally vote on the deal, as amended.

Hurrache

EKRIUQ wrote: »

Yes but that's Adam the Irish should "get over themselves" boulton he's always been very anti EU and Ireland.

Adam Boulton has been handling Brexit quite well, I certainly wouldn't say he's anti EU or Irish.

EdgeCase

If they think negotiating with the EU is difficult, try unpicking the Good Friday Agreement and putting it back together again. It would make Brexit seem like a walk in the park!

How anyone thinks the solution to resolving Brexit is undoing the Good Friday Agreement is beyond me.
It's jumping out of the frying pan and into the gaseous core of the sun, never mind the fire.

If they can't manage to negotiate with a very rational, facts-based multilateral organisation like the EU, I'm sure they'd have no problem whatsoever redoing the GFA with some of the chaos and dogma that makes up Northern Irish politics.

The fact that the NI Secretary wasn't even aware that unionists and nationalist didn't vote for each others' parties doesn't exactly inspire much confidence in their deep knowledge of the situation on the ground.

I'm also baffled as to how this lot are going to negotiate with anyone else either. The WTO for example is far more difficult to cut a deal with than the EU. It's a pure shark tank based on transactional arrangements. It's not at all like the EU which has an overarching objective of creating a peaceful, prosperous Europe and ideologies around ensuring fair playing fields, open internal markets and all of that. In comparison, the WTO is like fight club.

Also on bilateral agreements, they're so arrogant and cocky that I don't think they're going to be able to achieve very much at all.

They're also making assumptions that the US is aware of the nuances of the UK or particularly cares. The special relationship they go on about, from my perspective anyway, seems to largely be one about the US using them as a rubber stamping / legitimisation service for various conflicts they jumped head first into.

If it came to a negotiation with the US, the UK would just have to do what it's told as it would have absolutely no bargaining power whatsoever and Trump likes nothing more than a weak negotiating partner who can be exploited. That's how he's run business and that's how he runs the country.

If they take a harsh line on say Huawei whether or not it's justified, good luck with any China trade deal.

First Up

Hurrache wrote:

Adam Boulton has been handling Brexit quite well, I certainly wouldn't say he's anti EU or Irish.

Well he has to present both sides of an argument but I've him looking puzzled a few times as things were explained to him.

LeinsterDub

First Up wrote: »

Well he has to present both sides of an argument but I've him looking puzzled a few times as things were explained to him.

He doesn't. He's meant to be balanced , that doesn't mean you interview Buzz Aldrin and then cut to a man to believes the moon is made of cheese.

Tell me how

EdgeCase wrote: »

If they think negotiating with the EU is difficult, try unpicking the Good Friday Agreement and putting it back together again. It would make Brexit seem like a walk in the park!

How anyone thinks the solution to resolving Brexit is undoing the Good Friday Agreement is beyond me.
It's jumping out of the frying pan and into the gaseous core of the sun, never mind the fire.

If they can't manage to negotiate with a very rational, facts-based multilateral organisation like the EU, I'm sure they'd have no problem whatsoever redoing the GFA with some of the chaos and dogma that makes up Northern Irish politics.

The fact that the NI Secretary wasn't even aware that unionists and nationalist didn't vote for each others' parties doesn't exactly inspire much confidence in their deep knowledge of the situation on the ground.

Their position is influenced, I feel, by a few simple things.

As you said yourself, many have no idea of the nuances of the north and do not relate to the issues there any more than they do Israel/Palenstine.
They have a certain c'est la vie to the potential of northern related terrorist attacks as they do with potential exposure to Islamic terrorist attacks.
Speakers such as JRM, Boris etc will never be exposed to the risks associated with a border.
If a border goes up, it is likely that violence will originate from nationalist side, if so, the Brexiteers can say it has nothing to do with them or the UK.

EdgeCase

First Up wrote: »

Well he has to present both sides of an argument but I've him looking puzzled a few times as things were explained to him.

I would say to bear in mind that good broadcasters will play 'devil's advocate' to try to ensure that any debate or discussion is balanced and that both/all perspectives are put forward.

You never take or present any kind of dogmatic position, but you will always try put counterpoints to a guest and not just let them do a party political broadcast or go on some kind of an unchallenged monologue. It doesn't matter whether you agree or disagree with them, you have to ensure that you're probing what they're saying.

That does not imply that the broadcaster actually agrees / disagrees with the guest on a personal level.

It's also where the BBC has been failing miserably in recent months. They've too many presenters who are failing to challenge, largely Brexiteers, on statements that are simply not facts.

I'm more impressed with Sky News' political team than I am with the BBC at the moment. Faisal Islam and Beth Rigby are excellent and most of their anchors are displaying an ability to challenge anything and anyone. Sky were never tabloid and thankfully never morphed into a UK counterpart to Fox News, and are no longer anything to do with Murdock since the buy out by Comcast.

Boulton's choice of words may have been a bit harsh, but I don't think he was doing anything other than challenging a guest to justify their opinion.

Hurrache

That Murrison Amendment I mentioned yesterday, seems like there's more MPs now trying to push for that as a solution for both May and getting concessions from the EU.
https://twitter.com/alexwickham/status/1085110004812779520

And then this is just bizarre, although I'd hope that the poll was an online one which was manipulated by Brexiters.
https://twitter.com/Mike_Fabricant/status/1085104310684397568