Brexit Discussion Thread VI

Tell me how · 24-01-2019 10:52AM

Sir Ivan Rogers (until 2017 the Permanent Representative of the United Kingdom to the European Union) has given another noteworthy speech.

Both the text (31 pages) and the video (1 Hr 10 min) are available at the link below.

Sir Ivan Rogers Speech to UCL European Institute

Contained within

We are now being flogged the proposition that in order to move from a deep preferential agreement - the supranational political, juridical and enforcement aspects of high you deplore, but which gives you much the best trading terms with the bloc, above all in the sectors in which you are highly competitive - to a less deep, but normal EU preferential agreement which gives you substantially better access than WTO terms, the best route is to go all the way out to WTO terms first.

Because that will give you the whip hand in negotiations with a bloc for which the absence of any preferential deal covers a vastly lower proportion of its trade than it does of yours.

And the bloc would therefore come begging for a new preferential deal, drop completely its demand for the backstop, accept that technological and administrative solutions to the border suffice, when they have repeatedly previously made clear they cannot, and settle for much less than the money that the U.K. Prime Minister had already agreed to pay if she got an acceptable Withdrawal Agreement – which she now publicly agrees she has.

This stuff would make snake oil salesmen blush.

We are left with the bizarre spectacle of Brexiteers, many of whom used to argue that exiting to Norwegian or Swiss style destinations would be a vast improvement on remaining in the EU, because these were vibrant Parliamentary democracies whose peoples had bravely spurned European political integration in favour of free trading relationships from outside, arguing that if the U.K. now “escaped” only to such a destination, it would be a terrible betrayal.

It would be “Brexit in Name Only”, as bad as or worse than, the Prime Minister’s lousy deal, and a triumph for the “deep state” that has been wanting to sabotage Brexit from the outset.

He draws 4 main conclusions.

First, Article 50 can, for all its oddities, probably can work as an exit route.
Second, we have to understand how the EU works and negotiates, because
we shall, like it or not, not ever be floating free of ties and responsibilities in
the mid-Atlantic.
Third, baselines – where you start from - matter in negotiations.
Fourth and finally, one cannot rule out an extension of Article 50.

One of Theresa May's biggest mistakes was appointing people like David Davis, Boris Johnson to key roles in her government at the outset of negotiations while people like Rogers, with extensive experience of the EU were pushed to the sidelines and alienated because what they were saying was unpalatable.

J Mysterio · 24-01-2019 11:12AM

marieholmfan wrote: »

Airbus should not leave England without repaying all launch aid received for the past 30 years.
The UK should make clear that declarations of economic war against a NUCLEAR power are very very unwise.

lol, what a joke. Do you think they should nuke Airbus HQ or send the special forces in?

Grow up, this is a direct result of British idiocy as represented by Brexit.

Russman · 24-01-2019 11:13AM

Leroy42 wrote: »

And now we have Tory MP's calling for nationalisation of factories, which thought they were totally against and what they hate so much about Corbyn.

Yesterday we had JRM calling for the closing of parliament if a vote didn't go they way he liked, so sovereignty up to a point I suppose.

The the collective idea seems to be that democracy in the form of voting is actually undemocratic!

Once the craziness takes hold and mob mentality kicks in, there's no limit to what they'll come out with now. Unless of course some people stand to loose a lot of money (or maybe to not make a huge amount of money) if Brexit is postponed/cancelled - that'd make me pretty angry if it was me.

"Super project fear" ?? WTF is that then ? Will the thousands of trucks stuck at the border crossings be all a figment of someone's imagination ?

The UK desperately needs a leader to somehow shout "stop the madness", but I can't see it happening.

prawnsambo · 24-01-2019 11:15AM

marieholmfan wrote: »

Airbus should not leave England without repaying all launch aid received for the past 30 years.
The UK should make clear that declarations of economic war against a NUCLEAR power are very very unwise.

So if they pay back all the money they got, will you let them go without nuking them?

On a serious note, there's talk of companies who located in the UK because of their EU membership, suing the government for losses incurred that are directly associated with brexit because it's a clear breach of undertakings made to attract them there in the first place.

Zubeneschamali · 24-01-2019 11:20AM

CrabRevolution wrote: »

Seems similar to another (now banned) poster who reckoned that the USA and UK were "well within their rights" to invade the countries of the EU because of brexit.

I seem to recall a politician warning Spain that the British still have a navy if things get heated at Gibraltar?

Googling, yes, it was Michael Howerd, pointing out that another woman PM sent the navy to sort out the Argies for the Falklands, so Spain shouldn't get too grabby with Gibraltar.

CelticRambler · 24-01-2019 11:21AM

Lovely ambush of Martin Howe, QC, on Sky a few minutes ago:
MH : "No need to have physical infrastructure on the border ... [controls] can be done at the premises sending and receiving goods.

Some people use the words "hard border" to mean any sort of controls at all, whether they're conducted at the border or not.

There's no requirement under WTO law to have physical controls at the border."

Sky: Where can you cite where this doesn't take place?
MH: "There are very open borders, for example, between Switzerland and the EU, and between Norway and Sweden, both of which are ..."
Sky: I've been to both places and both of them have physical infrastructure.
MH: "But you don't need it!"
Sky: Why is it there if you don't need it?
MH: [squirms] Lets look at the position in Ireland and the Irish border. There are something like 300 road crossings ...

Sky: Where there are two different trading blocs - you've cited Switzerland, you've cited Scandinavia - in both cases there are actual physical infrastructure.
MH: "You don't need it! Let me explain this: there's no requirement under WTO rules to enforce customs controls by having a man wearing a peaked cap putting a pole across the road on the border!"

So there you have it. The Swiss are being primitive and inefficient, with their silly customs posts and lorry parks. :cool:

Akrasia · 24-01-2019 11:21AM

Seth Brundle wrote: »

It needs more leading CEOs to follow up with similar comments.

More Project fear you mean.

If Dyson moving his company to Singapore isn't enough to make brexiteers question the motives of their champions, then nothing will.

ancapailldorcha · 24-01-2019 11:22AM

Posts deleted and bans issued. No more one-liners please.

Enzokk · 24-01-2019 11:23AM

marieholmfan wrote: »

Airbus should not leave England without repaying all launch aid received for the past 30 years.
The UK should make clear that declarations of economic war against a NUCLEAR power are very very unwise.

I think you will find that Airbus has paid back all the RLI already. In fact the aid they have received for models like the A320 is still being paid a long time after the original amount has been settled because that is the way they were structured, that as long as deliveries still continue that there will be levy on each one. Seeing that the A320 alone has a backlog of about 6000 aircraft it is clear that there are two winners here.

The clue is in the official name, Repayable Launch Aid.

OPINION: A320 has repaid faith of Airbus - and governments

But that bold approach has more than paid off. The A320 went on to establish Airbus on the global stage, and force its rivals to up their game. And with 30 years and over 8,000 deliveries behind it, the little twinjet has more than repaid the early faith of the supporting governments many times over, thanks to that clause requiring a levy on each sale.

2 The Aerospace Industry

REPAYABLE LAUNCH INVESTMENT

17. Repayable Launch Investment is a government initiative to provide financial risk-sharing investment in the design and development of civil aerospace projects in the United Kingdom. It is designed to address the unwillingness of capital markets to fund projects with high product development costs, high technological and market risks and long pay back periods on investment. Government investment is repayable at a commercial rate of return, usually through levies on sales of the product. Launch Investment is only available to the civil aerospace sector.

Tell me how wrote: »

One of Theresa May's biggest mistakes was appointing people like David Davis, Boris Johnson to key roles in her government at the outset of negotiations while people like Rogers, with extensive experience of the EU were pushed to the sidelines and alienated because what they were saying was unpalatable.

Quite clearly it was a mistake, but if you had "Remainers" in charge of the negotiations then the Brexiters would only blame them for not delivering the promised land of the referendum campaign. By putting those who brought about Brexit in charge you lay the blame at their door as well.

Mr.Wemmick · 24-01-2019 11:24AM

prawnsambo wrote: »

So if they pay back all the money they got, will you let them go without nuking them?

On a serious note, there's talk of companies who located in the UK because of their EU membership, suing the government for losses incurred that are directly associated with brexit because it's a clear breach of undertakings made to attract them there in the first place.

Just waiting for a group of EU nationals who have relocated to the UK to work in the NHS, care services or education to sue the Government for f*cking up their lives and leaving them in limbo.

This farce is beyond words now.

Akrasia · 24-01-2019 11:24AM

marieholmfan wrote: »

Airbus should not leave England without repaying all launch aid received for the past 30 years.
The UK should make clear that declarations of economic war against a NUCLEAR power are very very unwise.

Airbus should sue the British government for unilaterally changing the terms under which they traded. Airbus invested billions in production facilities that would become useless the moment Britain crash out of the EU.

If Britain leaves the EU Customs Union and Single Market, their courts will be clogged up for years with corporations suing them for the financial losses associated with their decision change the fundamental trading platform of the UK

24-01-2019 11:27AM

Brexit is a direct result of the popularity of social media which keeps you in a bubble and feeds you only what you want to hear whether it be true or not.

josip · 24-01-2019 11:28AM

Akrasia wrote: »

Airbus should sue the British government for unilaterally changing the terms under which they traded. Airbus invested billions in production facilities that would become useless the moment Britain crash out of the EU.

If Britain leaves the EU Customs Union and Single Market, their courts will be clogged up for years with corporations suing them for the financial losses associated with their decision change the fundamental trading platform of the UK

I would assume that in that case, although the referendum was only advisory, it would still be used as the UK's defending argument?

Akrasia · 24-01-2019 11:30AM

josip wrote: »

I would assume that in that case, although the referendum was only advisory, it would still be used as the UK's defending argument?

The referendum never compelled the UK to leave either the Single Market, or the Customs Union.

Mr.Wemmick · 24-01-2019 11:30AM

Deleted User wrote: »

Brexit is a direct result of the popularity of social media which keeps you in a bubble and feeds you only what you want to hear whether it be true or not.

Don't forget the interfering Russians working tirelessly in the background to f*ck things up..

FreudianSlippers · 24-01-2019 11:41AM

eggman100 wrote: »

That's because you don't understand that staying in under the current 'deal' is not leaving at all, you seem to not understand the reasons why we voted to leave the corrupt EU. We also never voted for any kind of deal, we voted to leave the entire EU and this was all explained in Camerons pamphlet of doom about all the terrible things that would happen if we left the ECJ,customs union etc.
It was all BS of course as has been proven because none of these terrible things have happened that we were told would do, just for voting to leave. The

EU economy is going down the toilet, the UK doing well and record low unemployment - we were were told millions would loose jobs, complete BS again of course.

Ireland should follow us out if you don't want to pay for Greece bailout MK2 plus Italy and Spain. How about also governing yourselves instead of Ireland being like a county council of your masters in EU government?

You know you haven't left yet right?

Tell me how · 24-01-2019 11:43AM

Another rejection for Theresa May.

https://twitter.com/tconnellyRTE/status/1088375801500831744

Also, another interesting Tweet from Tony.

https://twitter.com/tconnellyRTE/status/1088383430797262848

I'd say that was intentionally to show that the rest of the world is moving on and is not interested in eternally dealing with the UK and their issues.

FreudianSlippers · 24-01-2019 11:44AM

Enzokk wrote: »

The DUP is not the UK Government nor should 10 votes decide policy for the whole country.

As I said before, the Tories need those 10 votes to remain in Government. So, it's not as irrelevant as everyone seems to be pretending.

Seth Brundle · 24-01-2019 11:48AM

Apparently Philip Hammond didn't want to discuss the future of Europe in Davos

UK chancellor of the exchequer Philip Hammond has pulled out of a key Davos panel on Thursday morning to discuss the future of Europe, on which the Taoiseach Leo Varadkar is appearing.

The updated schedule for the World Economic Forum panel says that Mr Varadkar will be joined by Dutch counterpart Mark Rutte and Polish prime minister Mateusz Morawiecki.

The issue of the Northern Ireland backstop is expected to feature on the panel, at a time when British prime minister Theresa May is seeking to secure approval for her withdrawal agreement.

https://www.irishtimes.com/business/economy/uk-s-philip-hammond-pulls-out-of-davos-panel-with-taoiseach-1.3769102

https://www.ft.com/content/e24d2ef6-1fb9-11e9-b126-46fc3ad87c65

FreudianSlippers · 24-01-2019 11:51AM

robinph wrote: »

One of the main UK Airbus, and the associated Rolls Royce engines, sites being right in the middle of one of constituencies for a full on Brexit supporting MP, who recently had an affair with another MP and they call the resulting sprog "Brexit" as it was born around the time of the referendum.

The major employer in his constituency that will not operate out side of the EU, and he's still convinced that Brexit is a good thing.

Airbus seems to be moving to Pratt & Whitney (US) and CFM International (France/US) engines for their A220, A320, A350 and the A380 is using the Engine Alliance (GE/Pratt & Whitney).

They still have options for the RR engines on the A330, but I think they are also offering Engine Alliance going forward.

FreudianSlippers · 24-01-2019 11:56AM

Enzokk wrote: »

I think you will find that Airbus has paid back all the RLI already. In fact the aid they have received for models like the A320 is still being paid a long time after the original amount has been settled because that is the way they were structured, that as long as deliveries still continue that there will be levy on each one. Seeing that the A320 alone has a backlog of about 6000 aircraft it is clear that there are two winners here.

The clue is in the official name, Repayable Launch Aid.

OPINION: A320 has repaid faith of Airbus - and governments

2 The Aerospace Industry

Quite clearly it was a mistake, but if you had "Remainers" in charge of the negotiations then the Brexiters would only blame them for not delivering the promised land of the referendum campaign. By putting those who brought about Brexit in charge you lay the blame at their door as well.

I think there may be RLI outstanding on the A380 though? Could be wrong.

ancapailldorcha · 24-01-2019 11:58AM

Deleted User wrote: »

Brexit is a direct result of the popularity of social media which keeps you in a bubble and feeds you only what you want to hear whether it be true or not.

I'm inclined to disagree. Older people are more likely to vote than younger people and are also less likely to hold social media accounts. I'd say decades of negativity, vitriol and deceit have done more for Brexit than echo chambers.

Hurrache · 24-01-2019 12:05PM

Tell me how wrote: »

I'd say that was intentionally to show that the rest of the world is moving on and is not interested in eternally dealing with the UK and their issues.

That's what I thought myself. Some are complaining they're avoiding the elephant in the room, but I like to think it's for reasons you say. Meanwhile Katya Adler from the BBC is still musing aloud as to what mechanism the EU may use to for their climb down from their backstop stance.

And geographically where's Ireland in the minds of Brexit and Remainer voters? Ireland, what's Ireland?

For both Leave and Remain voters, Ireland was often entirely absent, as was Africa.

Are there no maps in the UK?

https://twitter.com/PickardJE/status/1088332296497909760

MarkHenderson · 24-01-2019 12:09PM

Deleted User wrote: »

Brexit is a direct result of the popularity of social media which keeps you in a bubble and feeds you only what you want to hear whether it be true or not.

No it's a direct result of creating have's and have not's in a society. You leave a lot of people behind and this is the reuslt.

Tell me how · 24-01-2019 12:11PM

Deleted User wrote: »

Brexit is a direct result of the popularity of social media which keeps you in a bubble and feeds you only what you want to hear whether it be true or not.

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

I'm inclined to disagree. Older people are more likely to vote than younger people and are also less likely to hold social media accounts. I'd say decades of negativity, vitriol and deceit have done more for Brexit than echo chambers.

I think the media has largely failed in remaining impartial when discussing Brexit.

This tweet from the chief political commentator of the BBC could hardly be interpreted as anything other than derogatory towards Corbyn/Labour.

https://twitter.com/afneil/status/1088173584286134274

I think they have influenced their viewers in a manner similar to social media and which many more older people might be paying attention to. I agree though, it is because this has been going on for several decades that the public swell grew to vote to leave.

24-01-2019 12:11PM

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

I'm inclined to disagree. Older people are more likely to vote than younger people and are also less likely to hold social media accounts. I'd say decades of negativity, vitriol and deceit have done more for Brexit than echo chambers.

Believe it or not, social media is actually more popular with middle age and older generations. It's that negativity, vitriol and deceit which is inescapable and drip fed by social media outlets without ever giving you the other point of view.

munsterlegend · 24-01-2019 12:14PM

MarkHenderson wrote: »

No it's a direct result of creating have's and have not's in a society. You leave a lot of people behind and this is the reuslt.

Totally agree. It’s the same with with Trump and his success in America. If you have nothing you want radical change. Of course any country which has a leader based on hierarchy is doomed to inequality.

trellheim · 24-01-2019 12:15PM

As I said before, the Tories need those 10 votes to remain in Government.

Yes indeed ; if they had not had the DUP onside or the DUP had abstained in the confidence motion last week, then the UK Government would have fallen by one or two votes

Mr.Wemmick · 24-01-2019 12:18PM

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

I'm inclined to disagree. Older people are more likely to vote than younger people and are also less likely to hold social media accounts. I'd say decades of negativity, vitriol and deceit have done more for Brexit than echo chambers.

It's all of it - you can not single a thread out of the tangled mess.

The older generation buy the small-minded tory rags with their years of mind numbing BS. The Daily Fail cracked me up a few months ago headlining a story of Peter and Amanda (or who ever..) a young couple, saved for their own 1 bedroom tiny mortgaged house by living in a garden shed and eating grass for 5 years. Round of applause numpties, all hail these beautiful idiots while we gather up all your spare cash and prevent you from accessing basic services because the poor country can't afford any.

Ha! And I am not even a leftie.

joe40 · 24-01-2019 12:19PM

In all this confusion and uncertainty sterling is holding up reasonably well. I think a Euro was 0.87 sterling this morning.
Are the currency markets quietly confident this will be all sorted out before March or is it just the calm before the storm. I'm no expert in this field but it affects me considerably

Brexit Discussion Thread VI

Comments