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

Leroy42

I really like this line from the BBC article:

Conservative MPs have been told to back a proposal for an alternative to the Irish backstop - the insurance policy against the return of a hard border.

So what is the alternative to the backstop that has been proposed? Seems to me that the alternative is to simply remove it and take up the option of the additional year of transition that was already provided for the WA.

But what will the EU make of this? Effectively, the UK is putting off leaving the EU until at least Jan 2022. That would the UK more than enough to quite down the more extreme elements within the HoC and possibly even cancel the whole thing altogether. It may be hoped that putting it off until at least 2022, and probably further, will end up with the majority simply giving up on the whole thing.

But it avoids a hard border, at least until 2022, avoids any change in the budget, avoids any problems with trade etc.

But all it really does it push the can down the road. But there is a lot to be said for pushing things like this down the road.

lawred2

Leroy42 wrote: »

I really like this line from the BBC article:

So what is the alternative to the backstop that has been proposed? Seems to me that the alternative is to simply remove it and take up the option of the additional year of transition that was already provided for the WA.

But what will the EU make of this? Effectively, the UK is putting off leaving the EU until at least Jan 2022. That would the UK more than enough to quite down the more extreme elements within the HoC and possibly even cancel the whole thing altogether. It may be hoped that putting it off until at least 2022, and probably further, will end up with the majority simply giving up on the whole thing.

But it avoids a hard border, at least until 2022, avoids any change in the budget, avoids any problems with trade etc.

But all it really does it push the can down the road. But there is a lot to be said for pushing things like this down the road.

Is part of this amendment to formally seek an extension?

FrancieBrady

Leroy42 wrote: »

I really like this line from the BBC article:

So what is the alternative to the backstop that has been proposed? Seems to me that the alternative is to simply remove it and take up the option of the additional year of transition that was already provided for the WA.

But what will the EU make of this? Effectively, the UK is putting off leaving the EU until at least Jan 2022. That would the UK more than enough to quite down the more extreme elements within the HoC and possibly even cancel the whole thing altogether. It may be hoped that putting it off until at least 2022, and probably further, will end up with the majority simply giving up on the whole thing.

But it avoids a hard border, at least until 2022, avoids any change in the budget, avoids any problems with trade etc.

But all it really does it push the can down the road. But there is a lot to be said for pushing things like this down the road.

Meanwhile they continue to rip themselves apart internally? Seems like a recipe for disaster to me.

Russman

prawnsambo wrote: »

That ERG plan

It's pretty short on detail actually. In fact it's probably unkind to say that a junior cert student would have done a better job of producing a plan like that. It really looks like something that started life on the back of a fag packet and was padded out a bit to fill a page.

I just love how it refers to allowing both parties to prepare for WTO rules - they still can't get that they're the tiny party in a discussion with, effectively, an economic superpower (for all its faults). The EU doesn't have to concern itself with WTO issues.
As for their term "mutually beneficial" - that seems to really mean "what we want ourselves". Off the wall crazy.

Hurrache

Christy42 wrote: »

So this is why they are not worried about a no deal. Even the harshest they want effectively sees them in the union till 2021!

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-47037365

However it does seem to read like a deal would be required to extend the transition arrangement like this?

Wonder if we will see howls of betrayal over this.

Thats been already debunked last night by people who appeared to be in the know.

Peregrinus

Leroy42 wrote: »

I really like this line from the BBC article:

So what is the alternative to the backstop that has been proposed? Seems to me that the alternative is to simply remove it and take up the option of the additional year of transition that was already provided for the WA.

But what will the EU make of this? Effectively, the UK is putting off leaving the EU until at least Jan 2022. That would the UK more than enough to quite down the more extreme elements within the HoC and possibly even cancel the whole thing altogether. It may be hoped that putting it off until at least 2022, and probably further, will end up with the majority simply giving up on the whole thing.

But it avoids a hard border, at least until 2022, avoids any change in the budget, avoids any problems with trade etc.

But all it really does it push the can down the road. But there is a lot to be said for pushing things like this down the road.

It avoids a hard border until 2022 or later, but makes it a virtual certainty at that point, surely?

Which is not "kicking the can down the road"; it's deciding that there will be a hard border. The EU will not go for this.

prawnsambo

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Meanwhile they continue to rip themselves apart internally? Seems like a recipe for disaster to me.

Yeah. Nobody (with the possible exception of the very slow learners in the HoC) wants the can kicked any further down the road. It will just give more time for the exodus of industry and financial services. Death by a trillion cuts.

FrancieBrady

Peregrinus wrote: »

It avoids a hard border until 2022 or later, but makes it a virtual certainty at that point, surely?

Which is not "kicking the can down the road"; it's deciding that there will be a hard border. The EU will not go for this.

While they cannot explicit acknowledge it's the reason, I can't see the EU going for anything that emanates from the ERG wing.

Peregrinus

FrancieBrady wrote: »

While they cannot explicit acknowledge it's the reason, I can't see the EU going for anything that emanates from the ERG wing.

The EU don't care about provenance. As far as they're concerned, they engage with what emanates from HMG. Where HMG get their ideas is a matter of indifference to the EU.

But they do care about substance. Whatever emanates from HMG will not be acceptable unless it meets the EU's objectives, which include an assurance that a hard border will not eventuate. And (from the descriptions we've seen so far in the media) this proposal is going to fall at that hurdle.

downcow

Strazdas wrote: »

You never see the hard Brexiteers being tackled like this on the BBC - they are allowed spout their lies and rubbish at will

I can’t agree. I have started watching RTÉ news at 6 for the last couple of weeks. Have never seen it before. And I am amazed at how the journalists and politicians seem to be supporting each other. No real challenge at all to current thinking. Eg I never here the challenge that roi uncompromising position on the backstop is the very thing that may lead to a no deal. (Please I’m not debating that again I am simply say I never see it put strongly to politician by RTÉ).
I find little questioning on here of roi position and I think that is partly because you are not being challenged by you own media.
For anyone to say that the British media eg bbc is pro brexit is absurd.

Leroy42

Peregrinus wrote: »

The EU don't care about provenance. As far as they're concerned, they engage with what emanates from HMG. Where HMG get their ideas is a matter of indifference to the EU.

But they do care about substance. Whatever emanates from HMG will not be acceptable unless it meets the EU's objectives, which include an assurance that a hard border will not eventuate. And (from the descriptions we've seen so far in the media) this proposal is going to fall at that hurdle.

True, but there is a very real risk that failure to amend the WA will lead to a hard brexit, with the hard border. Both things the EU want to try to avoid.

One of the points during the last 2 years is that the EU were better to stay at the table talking rather than walking away when it appeared to many that the UK were not engaging. The point being that walking away 100% meant no deal and hard border whilst staying may not avoid that it gave at least some chance.

So why not continue that policy now? Would it not be better to keep everything as it is now for a further 3 years in the hope that sanity will eventually prevail?

(BTW I am only asking the question in terms of a possible EU response and to get other people opinions, I don't agree that the EU should allow this)

20silkcut

VinLieger wrote: »

In what way do you mean?

If there is economic hardship in this country due to Brexit how would you like to see Britain treated in trade negotiations etc post brexit ?

seamus

It occurred to me that I hadn't looked at all on Wikipedia in relation to Brexit, and found these gems this morning. Someone has been diligently collating the results of lots of polls, and it creates an amazing picture:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_polling_for_the_United_Kingdom_European_Union_membership_referendum#Post-referendum_polling

One set of polls ask if leaving the EU is the right or wrong decision, the other is basically a re-run of the Remain/Leave question.

Rather than, as one would expect, a slow change in attitudes over time, both polls shift to the other side immediately following the UK General Election.

While one could argue that the "common man on the street" doesn't know enough about Brexit, if we take a wisdom of the crowd view of this data, it seems like the UK electorate knew straight away, as early as June 2017, that the Government which Theresa May had cobbled together was incapable of getting Brexit over the line.

Leroy42

downcow wrote: »

I can’t agree. I have started watching RTÉ news at 6 for the last couple of weeks. Have never seen it before. And I am amazed at how the journalists and politicians seem to be supporting each other. No real challenge at all to current thinking. Eg I never here the challenge that roi uncompromising position on the backstop is the very thing that may lead to a no deal. (Please I’m not debating that again I am simply say I never see it put strongly to politician by RTÉ).
I find little questioning on here of roi position and I think that is partly because you are not being challenged by you own media.
For anyone to say that the British media eg bbc is pro brexit is absurd.

Because the arguments for Brexit have been debunked many times already. Why would the main news program for Ireland bother rehashing already debunked stuff.

"In news today, I know we covered the total loack of any plan for Brexit many times before, but in the interests of balance we are going to have yet another Brexiteer on to spout more soundbites with no susbstance".

Where does that get anyone? A position of "We don't want a hard border but are actively working on stopping anything that may avoid it" is not a debatable position.

FrancieBrady

downcow wrote: »

I can’t agree. I have started watching RTÉ news at 6 for the last couple of weeks. Have never seen it before. And I am amazed at how the journalists and politicians seem to be supporting each other. No real challenge at all to current thinking. Eg I never here the challenge that roi uncompromising position on the backstop is the very thing that may lead to a no deal. (Please I’m not debating that again I am simply say I never see it put strongly to politician by RTÉ).
I find little questioning on here of roi position and I think that is partly because you are not being challenged by you own media.
For anyone to say that the British media eg bbc is pro brexit is absurd.

Because the deal May got is full of compromises from the EU (and therefore Ireland)?

Because the Brexiteers (and DUP) are whinging 'victim' doesn't mean that other media orgs have to take up that tired cudgel for them.

I have watched RTE's news coverage all my life and I have to say they have aired a very balanced range of opinion on Brexit, across TV and Radio. They had Farage on last night who has disappeared off British media from what I can see.

Peregrinus

Leroy42 wrote: »

True, but there is a very real risk that failure to amend the WA will lead to a hard brexit, with the hard border. Both things the EU want to try to avoid.

Yes, but amending it may also lead to a hard border. And that would be much worse than a crash-out hard border , because that would be an agreed hard border.

I'd have no problem, in principle, with amendments to the WA which didn't increase the possiblitiy of a a hard border. But in practice (a) at this point there's very little time to negotiate amendments to the WA, and (b) the amendments the UK is likely to look for are all likely to increase the risk of a hard border.

Leroy42 wrote: »

One of the points during the last 2 years is that the EU were better to stay at the table talking rather than walking away when it appeared to many that the UK were not engaging. The point being that walking away 100% meant no deal and hard border whilst staying may not avoid that it gave at least some chance.

So why not continue that policy now? Would it not be better to keep everything as it is now for a further 3 years in the hope that sanity will eventually prevail?

Because the UK aren't looking to "keep everything as it is now"; they're looking to leave the EU with a Withdrawal Agreement. That's a big change.

"Keeping everything as it is now" would require an extension of the A50 period (which would keep things as they are now temporarily) or withdrawal of the A50 notice (which would keep things as they are now indefinitely).

VinLieger

20silkcut wrote: »

If there is economic hardship in this country due to Brexit how would you like to see Britain treated in trade negotiations etc post brexit ?

This should hopefully answer your question

MrMusician18

downcow wrote: »

I can’t agree. I have started watching RTÉ news at 6 for the last couple of weeks. Have never seen it before. And I am amazed at how the journalists and politicians seem to be supporting each other. No real challenge at all to current thinking. Eg I never here the challenge that roi uncompromising position on the backstop is the very thing that may lead to a no deal. (Please I’m not debating that again I am simply say I never see it put strongly to politician by RTÉ).
I find little questioning on here of roi position and I think that is partly because you are not being challenged by you own media.
For anyone to say that the British media eg bbc is pro brexit is absurd.

Are you having a laugh, the British media, with notable exceptions for the Guardian and the Times have been pro Brexit. The BBC is interesting, it is always pro-government, whatever their policy is, I could see remain bias before the referendum, but seems to be aiding to push the withdrawal deal through. Humphreys and Neil excepted of course. Adler has been dire and Kuenssberg is more interested in gossip than news.

The situation in the UK, media wise is not too dissimilar to the crash here. Irish people had to look to foreign media for a clear appraisal of the unvarnished story, domestic media had too much skin in the game. Tony Connolly for RTE has been excellent and should be required reading for those that claim to be politically informed in the UK.

Zubeneschamali

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Meanwhile they continue to rip themselves apart internally? Seems like a recipe for disaster to me.

A 1, 2, 5 year can-kick down the road won't make things worse, it will at worst mean the disaster happens then instead of March 29th, and it leaves more time for the HoC to ameliorate or just cancel the disaster.

So I think the EU will be OK with a can-kicking exercise. But this ERG plan is not simply kicking the can, it is killing the backstop, and then pretending it doesn't matter because it won't happen until 2021.

No - we would prefer you to crash and burn now, call us when you are cool with putting the backstop in place again thx bye.

Skelet0n

Anyone see Lord Saatchi’s “Lead not leave” campaign?
They want immigration control and the same voting rights as Germany in exchange for remaining? Incredible stuff.
https://www.channel4.com/news/conservative-peer-lord-maurice-saatchi-result-of-referendum-was-were-not-sure-we-cant-decide

Water John

The Malthouse Compromise is a proposal to keep the Tory party together, nothing more. It excludes the reality of the outside world.
EU asks why should we agree? ERG and Tories blame EU for intransigence.
Mogg and Baker pretending they are compromising when in fact, they are pushing hard towards the cliff.

spacecoyote

downcow wrote: »

I can’t agree. I have started watching RTÉ news at 6 for the last couple of weeks. Have never seen it before. And I am amazed at how the journalists and politicians seem to be supporting each other. No real challenge at all to current thinking. Eg I never here the challenge that roi uncompromising position on the backstop is the very thing that may lead to a no deal. (Please I’m not debating that again I am simply say I never see it put strongly to politician by RTÉ).
I find little questioning on here of roi position and I think that is partly because you are not being challenged by you own media.
For anyone to say that the British media eg bbc is pro brexit is absurd.

Sorry, but the UK voted to leave, not Ireland. This whole situation was created by Britain, and you want to blame the Irish for the mess?

The terms of the Good Friday agreement state there has to be regulatory alignment across both sides of the Irish border. The UK signed that agreement & now want to break from those terms...And that's somehow Ireland's fault?

I try not to get stuck in an echo chamber, but the nonsense you post a lot of the time just edges me closer to sticking you on a block list, because you're not arguing your case in good faith

PokeHerKing

The erg plan C is basically a timelimited backstop. You have to hand it to these lads, they've finally squared the circle.

LeinsterDub

Anyone have a link to what amendments are being voted on what what potential affect they could have?

prawnsambo

prawnsambo wrote: »

That ERG plan

It's pretty short on detail actually. In fact it's probably unkind to say that a junior cert student would have done a better job of producing a plan like that. It really looks like something that started life on the back of a fag packet and was padded out a bit to fill a page.

And just in case there was any doubt, Peston reports that it's gone down like a comedy sketch in Brussels.

Leroy42

Also IDS when asked about them agreeing to the €39bn claimed it was a compromise!

So paying back your financial obligations is now a compromise? I must get onto my bank looking for what they are going to offer me to continue to pay off my car loan

Water John

The EU know it's important not to let any daft notion get momentum and credence, kill it off early. Dead in the water, the Thames estuary, got no further.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/jan/29/amendments-to-may-statement-brexit-bill

This shows the amendments tabled so far, Bercow has not yet said which will be voted on.

Zubeneschamali

20silkcut wrote: »

how would you like to see Britain treated in trade negotiations etc post brexit ?

Trade negotiations are about finding a deal which makes both sides better off. So I would not like to see England punished for leaving, I would like to see them thrive so that we can get rich trading with them.

However, there is the issue of the border, and the fact that they have shown their word is worthless. So after a hard Brexit, I would like EU negotiators to tell the UK team that trade talks will not start until the UK pays its divorce bill and puts EU citizens rights and the backstop in legislation and passes that legislation.

VinLieger

Water John wrote: »

The EU know it's important not to let any daft notion get momentum and credence, kill it off early. Dead in the water, the Thames estuary, got no further.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/jan/29/amendments-to-may-statement-brexit-bill

This shows the amendments tabled so far, Bercow has not yet said which will be voted on.

Gotta love H "create a 250 person citizens assemble that can devise possible ways to move forward on brexit"....... in the 2 months that's left

Zubeneschamali

VinLieger wrote: »

Gotta love H "create a 250 person citizens assemble that can devise possible ways to move forward on brexit"....... in the 2 months that's left

It may be that the folks proposing this stuff know that it should have happened before A50, and they plan (by piling up things to do before Brexit) to make a case for pulling A50 and starting from scratch.

Withdrawing A50 is the one last minute action that the UK can do without further negotiations or agreement from anyone else - they just need a motion passed in Westminster to authorise it.