Brexit Discussion Thread VI

EdgeCase · 17-01-2019 12:26PM

What worries me about the GFA is that a lot of its moral authority over the UK Government is in the sensible side of politics in the US. The Dems in particular (due to the Clinton direct involvement) but also the centre of the Republican party, had a major weight to bear on the UK.

I would suspect Trump won't give a flying fiddlers what happens as it's 'overseas'.

Shelga · 17-01-2019 12:27PM

The more I think about it, the more I think it’s going to be No Deal.

What is the point of an extension? They’ll never agree on anything.

Let them crash out, let them feel the effects of it, it is at least a definitive result. May can also claim a form of success, as the result of the referendum will have been upheld.

_Puma_ · 17-01-2019 12:28PM

seamus wrote: »

I think it's quite the opposite tbh.

The UK are trying to insist on having no backstop and instead just an agreement about what next with the border. We know the Brits too well, their insistence on no backstop is so that they can have the freedom to renege on any border agreement without consequence.

The argument over the backstop is essentially the UK looking to be let off the hook over their GFA obligations, and Ireland and the EU insisting that it can't be permitted.

If they leave with no deal, then they will (eventually) be in breach of the GFA. There's not a whole lot we can do to prevent that, but there are machinations available to respond to it.

I agree 100%. A reset of A50 doesn't change any of the EU stances regarding the withdrawal agreement regarding N Ireland. I fully expect the UK to renege on their GFA commitments. Let them do it plain sight outside this "Red Line" withdrawal nonsense. Letting them leave on March 29th is just handing them a ready made excuse to pull down the GFA prematurely and in the short term will be more harmful to both countries. Not that the DUP care, they just want out and out now to the determent of event the minority of the population they represent now.

Adamcp898 · 17-01-2019 12:29PM

Corbyn speaking at the moment......

Thomas_IV · 17-01-2019 12:30PM

EdgeCase wrote: »

What worries me about the GFA is that a lot of its moral authority over the UK Government is in the sensible side of politics in the US. The Dems in particular (due to the Clinton direct involvement) but also the centre of the Republican party, had a major weight to bear on the UK.

I would suspect Trump won't give a flying fiddlers what happens as it's 'overseas'.

Sure and for assuming that there are plenty of other examples that just prove your point. Just to think about his attitude towards NATO etc..

bob mcbob · 17-01-2019 12:31PM

This is whole Brexit fiasco is looking more and more like Liar's Poker.

I still think the only possible option that will pass the HoC is a Norway option and I think everyone knows it but..

Theresa May will not adopt it because it will split the Tory Party
Brexiteers are only interested in replacing TM so they all need to show who has the biggest cojones about leaving the EU
Corbin wants to split the Tory party and / or does not want to alienate his pro-Brexit Northern working class base.

So what do I think will happen next - the senior parliamentarians / grown-ups (Dominic Grieve, Yvette Cooper, etc) will take control. First they will take no-deal off the table then progress a Norway option.

EdgeCase · 17-01-2019 12:32PM

Thomas_IV wrote: »

Sure and for assuming that there are plenty of other examples that just prove your point. Just to think about his attitude towards NATO etc..

Well he hates multilateralism and seems to have it in for the EU and particularly Germany for some reason. Also, I would suspect he may attempt to roast us on our trade balance with the US, which is distorted as we're a gateway into the single EU market. It would be like the EU taking aim at a particular US gateway state.

However, I think there's a huge problem as the GFA came from an era when the UK had very pragmatic domestic politics under Major and then Blair and when the US was still sane and it's an example of where US diplomacy and foreign policy actually played a very strongly positive role.

It's in a very precarious place right now as the GFA effectively used modern multilateralism to resolve the NI situation by making the differences in identity not matter.

Thomas_IV · 17-01-2019 12:33PM

Adamcp898 wrote: »

Corbyn speaking at the moment......

Had a quick look at BBC News. It's the usual talk he has, call for a GE. Looks that he's pondering on on this and when he loses that as well, then he should just pack in and resign as leader of the LP cos the result of a snap GE might not go his way and Labour lose more seats than it has now. Just like May was gambling in 2017 and lost her solid majority provided by Cameron. Maybe the LibDems would win on his expence. Worst would be the Tories getting back to their solid majority.

Thomas_IV · 17-01-2019 12:34PM

EdgeCase wrote: »

Well he hates multilateralism and seems to have it in for the EU and particularly Germany for some reason. Also, I would suspect he may attempt to roast us on our trade balance with the US, which is distorted as we're a gateway into the single EU market. It would be like the EU taking aim at a particular US gateway state.

However, I think there's a huge problem as the GFA came from an era when the UK had very pragmatic domestic politics under Major and then Blair and when the US was still sane and it's an example of where US diplomacy and foreign policy actually played a very strongly positive role.

It's in a very precarious place right now as the GFA effectively used modern multilateralism to resolve the NI situation by making the differences in identity not matter.

All very true.

MrMusician18 · 17-01-2019 12:35PM

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

I'm convinced that the EU27 will have no problem extending Article 50 to accommodate an informed referendum with Remain on the table.

The issue is with Parliament, as it always was given that most of what the EU gets blamed for is down to elected governments. I think the chances of a referendum on the deal just increased due to the present stalemate. The EU have no incentive to go back to negotiating. All it would take is a few more prominent political figures to back it. Perhaps the leader of the opposition...

The EU could let them exit into transition rather than extend article 50 on the basis that they either remain or ratify the withdrawal agreement within say 6 to 9 months.

By having the UK formally outside of the institutions during this period it would be less complicated for the EU elections. It would also mean that they would technically have to rejoin. This would force the UK population to decide if they want to be part of the full EU with no option outs or do their own thing.

Adamcp898 · 17-01-2019 12:36PM

Thomas_IV wrote: »

Had a quick look at BBC News. It's the usual talk he has, call for a GE. Looks that he's pondering on on this and when he loses that as well, then he should just pack in and resign as leader of the LP cos the result of a snap GE might not go his way and Labour lose more seats than it has now. Just like May was gambling in 2017 and lost her solid majority provided by Cameron. Maybe the LibDems would win on his expence. Worst would be the Tories getting back to their solid majority.

Yep, just finished. Not a whole lot has changed. Calling for a people's vote is the very last option

Thomas_IV · 17-01-2019 12:38PM

MrMusician18 wrote: »

The EU could let them exit into transition rather than extend article 50 on the basis that they either remain or ratify the withdrawal agreement within say 6 to 9 months.

By having the UK formally outside of the institutions during this period it would be less complicated for the EU elections. It would also mean that they would technically have to rejoin. This would force the UK population to decide if they want to be part of the full EU with no option outs or do their own thing.

The UK govt has already announced last year that due to the Brexit process the UK isn't taking part in the EU elections anymore. Whether there would be a change in that because of an extension of the leave date is questionable.

Thomas_IV · 17-01-2019 12:40PM

Adamcp898 wrote: »

Yep, just finished. Not a whole lot has changed. Calling for a people's vote is the very last option

I presume that the influence Momentum might have on him is already fading away.

Berserker · 17-01-2019 12:40PM

Thomas_IV wrote: »

Worst would be the Tories getting back to their solid majority.

Why would it be the worst? Would a Tory majority not be an improvement on the current situation?

Thomas_IV · 17-01-2019 12:41PM

Berserker wrote: »

Why would it be the worst? Would a Tory majority not be an improvement on the current situation?

No it wouldn't cos that would also mean more austerity for the future.

Berserker · 17-01-2019 12:51PM

Thomas_IV wrote: »

No it wouldn't cos that would also mean more austerity for the future.

And a Labour government post Brexit wouldn't lead to austerity?

Professor Moriarty · 17-01-2019 01:04PM

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

I'm convinced that the EU27 will have no problem extending Article 50 to
accommodate an informed referendum with Remain on the table.

Agreed - if that was the will of a significant majority in parliament. There isn't a significant majority presently.

The issue is with Parliament, as it always was given that most of what the EU
gets blamed for is down to elected governments. I think the chances of a
referendum on the deal just increased due to the present stalemate. The EU have
no incentive to go back to negotiating. All it would take is a few more
prominent political figures to back it. Perhaps the leader of the
opposition...

His position is interesting. I think he's playing a very dangerous game if he wants to stay as leader and potential PM. Politically, however bad things are presently, they will probably become much worse very quickly. While this will almost certainly lead to a fractured Tory party, it will also expose serious divisions within the Labour party. Considering that a large majority of Labour members and voters are pro EU, Corbyn's closet Eurosceptism, and his dissembling at a time when Labour needs strong leadership that reflects the wishes of the party, will place him in a very precarious position very soon.

Thomas_IV · 17-01-2019 01:06PM

Berserker wrote: »

And a Labour government post Brexit wouldn't lead to austerity?

Sure it would, but Corbyn tells otherwise cos he's talking abolishing austerity by taxing the rich but the rich are not that stupid to get into that trap and either have already or are about to bring their assets out of the UK.

In 2015, shortly after Corbyn was elected as leader of the LP, I took the bother to read his own written pamphlet of his political agenda. Some suggestions in there were agreeable to me, but this is all based on taxing the rich more in order to make them contribute more financially to the state. I have found it on the internet so you can have a look into it yourself via the link below.

https://d3n8a8pro7vhmx.cloudfront.net/jeremyforlabour/pages/70/attachments/original/1437556345/TheEconomyIn2020_JeremyCorbyn-220715.pdf?1437556345

This ideas are an old hat and it's never going to work and because of that I didn't give much about his ideas and in the years that followed and he was more in the focus of the daily politics, I came to despise him. Not so much because of his own pamphlet, but because of the way he dealt with Brexit and let the Remain camp down.

Thomas_IV · 17-01-2019 01:09PM

correct horse battery staple wrote: »

Brexit also poses a serious problem for SF here in Ireland come the EU elections, doing their usual anti EU eurosceptic dance copying lines from UKIP wont work this time around

Last time I was looking at them I was more of the Impression that the Shinners aren't anti-EU or eurosceptic as they stood on the Remain side in NI. But well, I know the Janus-headed SF Party under the leadership of Gerry Adams. I would rather think that times have changed since he stepped down and that SF can't afford to associate itself with the far-right and right-wingers.

Adamcp898 · 17-01-2019 01:10PM

Thomas_IV wrote: »

I presume that the influence Momentum might have on him is already fading away.

To be honest I don't think anything is going to change his tack. He's much too far down the road of saying he'll respect the leave vote et al. Arguably so far that if he were to change now, and a GE was held in the next few months, it'd be thrown back at him as another bit of flip-flopping.

Not that I'd be very confident in him if he actually got his wish of a GE being held before a Brexit deal is decided as it is. Any Labour swell of support, as far as I can tell, is actually coming from people who are under the impression that Lb don't want Brexit to happen which just plainly isn't the case. Once the electorate would cop that in any campaign then he'd probably lose more ground.

Anyway, says he'll reveal all of Labour's amendments next week. Brexit "Plan B" vote scheduled for the 29th. Same day as Donald delivers the "State of the Union" ominously enough.

ancapailldorcha · 17-01-2019 01:10PM

MrMusician18 wrote: »

The EU could let them exit into transition rather than extend article 50 on the basis that they either remain or ratify the withdrawal agreement within say 6 to 9 months.

By having the UK formally outside of the institutions during this period it would be less complicated for the EU elections. It would also mean that they would technically have to rejoin. This would force the UK population to decide if they want to be part of the full EU with no option outs or do their own thing.

Interesting point. A good way for the EU to up the ante perhaps but it might be taken as a slight by the Brexiteers.

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

Agreed - if that was the will of a significant majority in parliament. There isn't a significant majority presently.

It could be. I think most Parliamentarians are either resigned to Brexit or afraid to speak out for a new referendum for fear of antagonising voters and/or being labelled undemocratic. I know someone who works in Whitehall who's been telling me that Tory MP's are livid about the whole affair and what it means for their personal portfolios. Obviously anecdotal so up to you whether or not that's legit.

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

His position is interesting. I think he's playing a very dangerous game if he wants to stay as leader and potential PM. Politically, however bad things are presently, they will probably become much worse very quickly. While this will almost certainly lead to a fractured Tory party, it will also expose serious divisions within the Labour party. Considering that a large majority of Labour members and voters are pro EU, Corbyn's closet Eurosceptism, and his dissembling at a time when Labour needs strong leadership that reflects the wishes of the party, will place him in a very precarious position very soon.

Indeed. If he is seen as enabling economic collapse then we could be back to the problem of identikit politicians depriving the public of real choice such as what we had in 2010 and that led to Brexit.

Enzokk · 17-01-2019 01:22PM

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

It could be. I think most Parliamentarians are either resigned to Brexit or afraid to speak out for a new referendum for fear of antagonising voters and/or being labelled undemocratic. I know someone who works in Whitehall who's been telling me that Tory MP's are livid about the whole affair and what it means for their personal portfolios. Obviously anecdotal so up to you whether or not that's legit.

That point was raised by Owen Jones, if Labour would propose a second referendum then only 150-160 would support it in the party. He also mentioned that Labour is wary of upsetting the leave voters as well.

The stupidity is that the current government is handcuffed by 70 ERG members and 10 DUP voters and Labour is handcuffed by the 31% of Labour voters that voted to leave in the referendum. The party is ignoring the majority of voices not to upset the minority in either party and that leads to chaos.

Professor Moriarty · 17-01-2019 01:28PM

Enzokk wrote: »

That point was raised by Owen Jones, if Labour would propose a second referendum then only 150-160 would support it in the party. He also mentioned that Labour is wary of upsetting the leave voters as well.

The stupidity is that the current government is handcuffed by 70 ERG members and 10 DUP voters and Labour is handcuffed by the 31% of Labour voters that voted to leave in the referendum. The party is ignoring the majority of voices not to upset the minority in either party and that leads to chaos.

It will very probably lead to a break up of the Tory and Labour parties. The divisions within those parties reflect the Brexit and referendum divisions simply because both parties were 'pro Brexit'. The Lib Dems and SNP have very little division precisely because they have relative party unity in their anti Brexit policies. Factor in two very incompetent leaders and you have the perfect conditions for party splits.

Thomas_IV · 17-01-2019 01:31PM

Meanwhile in Scotland:

https://www.scotsman.com/news/politics/brexit-nicola-sturgeon-promises-independence-timetable-in-weeks-1-4857393

Nicola Sturgeon has said Theresa May is “deluding herself” by trying to persist with her Brexit red lines, and suggested details of the timetable for a second Scottish independence referendum would be revealed within “weeks”. The First Minister was at Westminster to meet with SNP MPs, and said an extension of Article 50 and a People’s Vote were the only realistic options to break the Brexit deadlock.

However, she added: “I’ll say more about the timing of a referendum in the next matter of weeks. “I want to see the UK stay in the EU, I think that would be best for the whole of the UK... even when Scotland is independent, that serves our interests best as well. That’s why we’re backing the People's Vote, the second EU referendum. “But if that’s not possible, in terms of our wider interests, the chaos and the fiasco of the last couple of years have shown that the worst thing for Scotland is to be thirled to Westminster when it’s making such a mess of things. We’d be far better off in charge of our own affairs.”

...

But Mr Corbyn has only one thing in mind which is to get into No 10 himself.

In the weeks before the meaningful vote was dated to vote before Christmas but has been postponed to 15th January 2019, Ms Sturgeon travelled a couple of times to London to also meet with Mrs May to talk on the Brexit subject and the deal at hand. Apparently it wasn't successful and the result is that what came to be on 15th January.

Ms Sturgeon is very often accused by her opponents to only use this Brexit turmoil as advantage for ther own interests to bring about an IndyRef2 in Scotland with the negative effects of a hard Brexit leading to more support for an independent Scotland.

There is certainly some truth in it and I wouldn't expect Ms Sturgeon to deny that at all. Just when one looks at the way the UK govt has treated the Scottish govt of which Ms Sturgeon is the leader and how many times and how stubborn Mrs May and her govt have ignored the interests of Scotland as one part of the UK that voted in majority for Remain in 2016 and for which the result of the 2014 IndyRef which the SNP lost because it was somehow 'guaranteed' that the UK stays in the EU, it isn't any wonder that Ms Sturgeon is now pressing for a timetable for IndyRef2.

This Brexit will certainly bring the UK to the breaking point and it is just a matter of constitutional obstacles the Scottish govt has to take to put an IndyRef2 to the people of Scotland. This is the way out of the Brexit mess for Scotland and as matters are still worse by now, they are left with no other way than this unless they are to go down the hard no-deal Brexit way which Scotland won't.

Sure, Mrs May will certainly refuse to give her consent to an IndyRef2 in Scotland and give way to such a legislation in the Commons and her allies will also do the same to avoid that. Maybe there are other ways to do it and a snap GE in the next couple of weeks / months might also be a game changer on that one, depending on the result and who's in govt afterwards.

The tensions will certainly grow and become more, not less in the weeks or maybe months that lie ahead until the final exit of the UK from the EU.

Laois_Man · 17-01-2019 01:45PM

I haven't got a clue what the logic is behind all of this Brexit Plan B lark. It's nonsense!

There are 5 options

1. No deal Exit
2. Accept May's deal

An extension to Article 50 on the basis of......

3. A second referendum
4. A UK offer to renegotiate, but with the red lines now on the table
5. Parliament withdraws article 50 and remains indefinitely

Option 1 might happen by default - and not beyond possibility that it all becomes so disastrous, that there could be a referendum to re-join after they have left - or at least to rejoin the SM and CU in some way.

Option 2 obviously can never happen now

Option 3: The only way May would ever agree to a second referendum would be if the options on the ballot paper were both (or all) different forms of Brexit - i.e. no "Remain" option presented, as it has already been defeated. However, the EU will not grant an article 50 extension on the basis of that - So I don't see how a second referendum could happen under May's Tenure.

Option 4 would probably be too close to a second referendum with a "remain" victory than would be acceptable to May.

Option 5 could arguably happen is defiance of May, but probably wouldn't, arguably.

So, like it or not, the only thing that is really likely to happen is 1 or 4 - They are the only so-called "Plan B" options possible. And the only way option 4 won't just lead back to option 1 all over again is if they do it the right way around at the second attempt and agree the trade deal before exiting, thus removing any mention of the word "backstop" from the WA - which is what should have been done in the first place.

That leads to the real possibility that it would all drag out to beyond the 2022 election and beyond May's time in office, which she also wants to avoid as she sees this as her place in history.

But the thing that was conspicuous by its absence from her speech last night was - when she asked others to set aside self interests, she should have said she is prepared to do the same. She didn't - because she isn't.

In conclusion - IMO, whether it's option 1 or option 4, it is all heading for a no deal Brexit for as long as Teresa May is PM - and possibly as long as any Tory is PM for that matter.

lawred2 · 17-01-2019 01:54PM

Laois_Man wrote: »

I haven't got a clue what the logic is behind all of this Brexit Plan B lark. It's nonsense!

There are 5 options

1. No deal Exit
2. Accept May's deal

An extension to Article 50 on the basis of......

3. A second referendum
4. A UK offer to renegotiate, but with the red lines now on the table
5. Parliament withdraws article 50 and remains indefinitely

Option 1 might happen by default - and not beyond possibility that it all becomes so disastrous, that there could be a referendum to re-join after they have left - or at least to rejoin the SM and CU in some way.

Option 2 obviously can never happen now

Option 3: The only way May would ever agree to a second referendum would be if the options on the ballot paper were both (or all) different forms of Brexit - i.e. no "Remain" option presented, as it has already been defeated. However, the EU will not grant an article 50 extension on the basis of that - So I don't see how a second referendum could happen under May's Tenure.

Option 4 would probably be too close to a second referendum with a "remain" victory than would be acceptable to May.

Option 5 could arguably happen is defiance of May, but probably wouldn't, arguably.

So, like it or not, the only thing that is really likely to happen is 1 or 4 - They are the only so-called "Plan B" options possible. And the only way option 4 won't just lead back to option 1 all over again is if they do it the right way around at the second attempt and agree the trade deal before exiting, thus removing any mention of the word "backstop" from the WA - which is what should have been done in the first place.

That leads to the real possibility that it would all drag out to beyond the 2022 election and beyond May's time in office, which she also wants to avoid as she sees this as her place in history.

But the thing that was conspicuous by its absence from her speech last night was - when she asked others to set aside self interests, she should have said she is prepared to do the same. She didn't - because she isn't.

In conclusion - IMO, whether it's option 1 or option 4, it is all heading for a no deal Brexit for as long as Teresa May is PM - and possibly as long as any Tory is PM for that matter.

thought the trade deal was not up for discussion until Britain left - during the transition phase

Laois_Man · 17-01-2019 01:56PM

lawred2 wrote: »

thought the trade deal was not up for discussion until Britain left - during the transition phase

That has to change! And I don't see why it can't!

lawred2 · 17-01-2019 02:04PM

Laois_Man wrote: »

That has to change! And I don't see why it can't!

the presumption in doing that then is that a trade deal can be done during the period of extension...

not sure how feasible that is..

unless the 'extension' is to be deemed indefinite..

that won't go down too well with the same crowd that nothing goes down too well with

Leroy42 · 17-01-2019 02:04PM

Laois_Man wrote: »

That has to change! And I don't see why it can't!

It has to change? Why?

How can the EU hold trade talks with a country that is still a member? Country look for trade talks when they want to increase trade, not reduce it. And you can possibly have UK reps working on the EU side in a negotiation with the UK, with UK MEP's having a vote on any EU deal?

It makes no sense.

And all because the UK cannot face up to their own responsibilities

Water John · 17-01-2019 02:06PM

There isn't a lot to be got by talking to TM ATM, she rules out any CU or 2nd Ref.
She's adding to her red lines not dropping them.

Brexit Discussion Thread VI

Comments