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; } } }

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

[Deleted User]

The former Greek finance minister was on Newsnight last night.

The guy with the name beginning with V that I can't spell.

He's a guy I'd rearly agree with but he made a great point that Brexit has been a lost opportunity for EU reform.

The way the British have handled the result has allowed the EU to avoid to he hard questions about why the result was Leave.

I was hoping after the referendum that the EU would look at itself and see what it was doing wrong, unfortunately the way it has worked out has meant that the EU can avoid the hard questions about the direction the European project is taking.

It's all well and good to be pro European now when it's in our favor but the landscape was very different 10 years ago when they were sticking it to us over the banking crisis.

There was a Spanish government minister also on the show and she was advocating greater European political cohesion.

That made me sad.

snailsong

BorneTobyWilde wrote: »

Remain would need to gain 2m votes, I dunno where they get them, maybe from those who turned 18 since 2016.

I have heard this argument in favour of a second referendum on a few occasions but I think we are overlooking an important consideration.
The argument goes like this...
Older voters are more likely to vote leave. True. Younger voters are more likely remainers , also true.
Since 2016 several million older voters have passed away to be replaced by younger voters, now turned 18.
The problem, as I see it, is the bulk of the electorate in between, all of whom are 3 years older. The UK has an aging population and an aging electorate. If older means more conservative then the passage of time won't help the remainers in a second vote. Just a thought.

AtomicHorror

Anthracite wrote: »

When you factor in the time getting to and from the airport, and waiting at the airport, and security, that difference is really rather diminished.

LHR vs AMS, probably yes, but LCY vs AMS there's no comparison. LCY is like a bus terminal, you can be through it in minutes. I've had several long waits in AMS, including a connection missed due to security delays.

Also every request for a trip to Amsterdam is accompanied, as mandatory, by tiresome jokes about weed and brothels.

VinLieger

Fr Tod Umptious wrote: »

The former Greek finance minister was on Newsnight last night.

The guy with the name beginning with V that I can't spell.

He's a guy I'd rearly agree with but he made a great point that Brexit has been a lost opportunity for EU reform.

The way the British have handled the result has allowed the EU to avoid to he hard questions about why the result was Leave.

I was hoping after the referendum that the EU would look at itself and see what it was doing wrong, unfortunately the way it has worked out has meant that the EU can avoid the hard questions about the direction the European project is taking.

It's all well and good to be pro European now when it's in our favor but the landscape was very different 10 years ago when they were sticking it to us over the banking crisis.

There was a Spanish government minister also on the show and she was advocating greater European political cohesion.

That made me sad.

Anything Varoufkis says on europe should be weighed against the knowledge of his extreme socialist anti eu bias.

We know much of why leave won, massive and gross misunderstandings of what the EU is and how it works with the UK that have been developed and fed for decades by right wing voices, lies told by the former to reinforce those misunderstandings, general political apathy and of course the protest vote.

All those taken into account quite easily explain a 52% majority.

Infini

lawred2 wrote: »

wow - that's repugnant, crass and offensive

Extremely personal too

Why does UK discourse always have to reduce to baser elements and denigration of personalities?

Honestly that's not even funny or humorous it's just plain bad taste and show's exactly what kind of guttersnipe rubbish these so called publications have degraded to. No wonder they're the least trusted media in Europe right now.

Fr Tod Umptious wrote: »

The former Greek finance minister was on Newsnight last night.

The guy with the name beginning with V that I can't spell.

He's a guy I'd rearly agree with but he made a great point that Brexit has been a lost opportunity for EU reform.

The way the British have handled the result has allowed the EU to avoid to he hard questions about why the result was Leave.

I was hoping after the referendum that the EU would look at itself and see what it was doing wrong, unfortunately the way it has worked out has meant that the EU can avoid the hard questions about the direction the European project is taking.

It's all well and good to be pro European now when it's in our favor but the landscape was very different 10 years ago when they were sticking it to us over the banking crisis.

There was a Spanish government minister also on the show and she was advocating greater European political cohesion.

That made me sad.

I wouldn't completely write off everything Varoufkis says of course but the flaw in his argument is that while we all know the EU is needing reform and improvement's expecially more focus around consolidation rather than expansion and more focus on fixing the flaws in the current EU system reform was never going to be able to be high priority with Brexit dominating the agenda and the need for the rest to protect the rest of the union.

In addition it ignores the blatent flaws in the UK's system that lead to this as well, a good deal of this isn't really the EU's fault its the Brit's fault who were asleep at the wheel not looking after their own country. Throw in mismanagment and financial and polictical interference along with political incompetence and it's pretty clear that the UK is in this situation mainly because of its own failures NOT the EU.

Igotadose

Seth Brundle wrote: »

Can't link to the video directly but Suella Braverman was challenged on her border nonsense by Jess Phillips on LBC yesterday...
https://www.lbc.co.uk/radio/presenters/iain-dale/mps-clash-over-post-brexit-irish-border-question/

When confronted, Braverman named 2 experts. Here's a link to a paper proposing 'frictionless borders' from one of them, Lars Karlsson: https://www.larskarlsson.com/?p=5298

Here's the paper Karlsson wrote: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/STUD/2017/596828/IPOL_STU(2017)596828_EN.pdf

He does have border 'chops' so this isn't some rabid Leaver, but someone that's dealt with Sweden/Norway border issues as a career.

[Deleted User]

VinLieger wrote: »

Anything Varoufkis says on europe should be weighed against the knowledge of his extreme socialist anti eu bias.

We know much of why leave won, massive and gross misunderstandings of what the EU is and how it works with the UK that have been developed and fed for decades by right wing voices, lies told by the former to reinforce those misunderstandings, general political apathy and of course the protest vote.

All those taken into account quite easily explain a 52% majority.

Yep. I think it's a comical idea to reform oneself based on the opinions of people who don't even know you or understand you. People who've been lied to about who and what you actually are.

robinph

BorneTobyWilde wrote: »

Remain would need to gain 2m votes, I dunno where they get them, maybe from those who turned 18 since 2016.

Far less than that would need to switch the way they voted in the initial referendum. There was a difference of 1,269,502 votes for leave, you only need 50% of those to change how they voted to have made it a remain result though.

There was only 634,751 votes in it.

Water John

Juncker was attacked a number of times by Andrew Pierse Ass Ed The Sun on Sky Press Preview last night. Since Selmayr is now the driving force on the EU side will he be subjected to the same personal vitriol?

nemefuria

Igotadose wrote: »

When confronted, Braverman named 2 experts. Here's a link to a paper proposing 'frictionless borders' from one of them, Lars Karlsson: https://www.larskarlsson.com/?p=5298

Here's the paper Karlsson wrote: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/STUD/2017/596828/IPOL_STU(2017)596828_EN.pdf

He does have border 'chops' so this isn't some rabid Leaver, but someone that's dealt with Sweden/Norway border issues as a career.

But if all this technology already exists and it's easy to implement, then the backstop will never have to come into play. Why all the objections to the backstop then?

prawnsambo

Igotadose wrote: »

When confronted, Braverman named 2 experts. Here's a link to a paper proposing 'frictionless borders' from one of them, Lars Karlsson: https://www.larskarlsson.com/?p=5298

Here's the paper Karlsson wrote: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/STUD/2017/596828/IPOL_STU(2017)596828_EN.pdf

He does have border 'chops' so this isn't some rabid Leaver, but someone that's dealt with Sweden/Norway border issues as a career.

I read those papers before. The one assumption he makes that cannot be made about the NI border is that everyone is going to automatically follow the rules.

Well, we know that won't happen. It's a smuggler's licence and in addition, the imposition of tariffs on goods going either way will make it a smuggler's paradise. As a customs officer was quoted as saying: "No technology can look inside vans".

Infini

nemefuria wrote: »

But if all this technology already exists and it's easy to implement, then the backstop will never have to come into play. Why all the objections to the backstop then?

It doesn't exist its fairies and unicorns delusions. What's been proven though is that the UK cannot be trusted without the backstop as their leaders and politicians are currently untrustworthy and of mind to break agreements simply because it doesn't suit them sometimes only just after agreeing to do so.

Zubeneschamali

prawnsambo wrote: »

It's a smuggler's licence and in addition, the imposition of tariffs on goods going either way will make it a smuggler's paradise. As a customs officer was quoted as saying: "No technology can look inside vans".

They don't even need tariffs. The UK leaving the EU VAT area will be enough to create a smuggling zone.

prawnsambo

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

They don't even need tariffs. The UK leaving the EU VAT area will be enough to create a smuggling zone.

Yep, but that requires paperwork in order to maximise profit. You can make far more on tariff differences alone and don't need to get involved in red tape. Beef tariffs are €3/kg plus 12.8% value. Just load up and cross the border with it and sell it off at a nice margin in NI.

lawred2

Did anyone watch the excellent doc series 'WWII in Colour'? It's on Netflix if no-one has seen it.

One thing the show did excellently was detail the many steps along the way to war. Ran through the twenties and thirties and utterly bonkers public votes and the clearly wrong headed policies/positions enacted/taken by governments across Europe at that time...

I was watching it at the time shaking my head in disbelief - saying 'well that was obviously never going to work out well'... wondering how did people go along with this at the time...

I feel that we are here again watching similar levels of self destructive madness... where is this going to lead us.

Populism is an amazing thing. It has a magnetic force. And resisting it is so incredibly hard. Look at the polls - they show an almost alarmingly solid belief that 'Europe' is doing UK (England) down. Yet this would seem utterly at odds with how we see reality.

But what does how we see reality matter?

If Britain does crash out - and the inevitable consequences that follow won't be seen as anything other than more evidence of 'Europe's' vindictive nature towards the UK. Sure Folkstonian's recent contributions are anecdotal evidence of that. Resorting to cliches and running down individual personalities. Zero inward reflection. And that Times 'comic' - good grief. That's just grim in its vulgarity.

It won't be a case of lessons learned.

I fear that we're all just frogs happily sitting in a slowly warming pot.

Chips Lovell

Fr Tod Umptious wrote: »

He's a guy I'd rearly agree with but he made a great point that Brexit has been a lost opportunity for EU reform.

The way the British have handled the result has allowed the EU to avoid to he hard questions about why the result was Leave.

I don't disagree that the EU is in need of reform. But I don't think the vote to leave was largely driven by that need for reform. A far larger factor was internal UK politics and discourse, where for 30-odd years the EU was used a convenient bogeyman and whipping boy.

seamus

lawred2 wrote: »

If Britain does crash out - and the inevitable consequences that follow won't be seen as anything other than more evidence of 'Europe's' vindictive nature towards the UK.

It won't be a case of lessons learned.

I fear that we're all just frogs happily sitting in a slowly warming pot.

This has been on my mind since 2016.
Particularly the period between the first two world wars, where populism was used in Germany to blame the rest of Europe for their economic woes.

There's always been a question mark over just what allowed Nazi Germany to rise; was it harsh economic sanctions suppressing their economy, or was it appeasement that allowed them too much leeway? Was it both?

It's hard to know, but creates questions on what needs to be done next. If the UK ends up a basket case after Brexit and we treat them with kid gloves, will the populists start moving towards authoritarianism and then war? Or do we need to treat them harshly, penalise them for breaking the rules and force them into line?

Hurrache

Fr Tod Umptious wrote: »

He's a guy I'd rearly agree with but he made a great point that Brexit has been a lost opportunity for EU reform.

The way the British have handled the result has allowed the EU to avoid to he hard questions about why the result was Leave.

I was hoping after the referendum that the EU would look at itself and see what it was doing wrong, unfortunately the way it has worked out has meant that the EU can avoid the hard questions about the direction the European project is taking.

It would be a good point if Brexit was voted for with logical reasons. But it wasn't, so the answers they find in the referendum as to why the UK left will have nothing to do with the EU.

I mean it was said here yesterday one of the reasons leave won was because people didn't like the personality of 2 of the protagonists in the current negotiations.

Akrasia

I had a thought today about all the people who are saying that a 'no deal' brexit would actually be good for the UK.

Imagine if instead of the UK voting to leave the UK, that the EU had kicked the UK out of the EU for some reason or other, and if instead of the EU begging the UK to be reasonable and either stay in the EU or come up with a workable solution to maintain close diplomatic and trading relationships with the EU, the EU was saying the UK would have to just crash out losing all of their international trade agreements and losing access to food and medicines and international trade.

Imagine if the hard Brexiteers were getting exactly what they are currently hoping for, but it was the EU who were pushing the UK out instead of the UK leaving themselves.

The exact same people who are angry about the EU trying to preserve the best possible relationship with the UK today, would be calling for war against the EU for giving them essentially exactly what they're hoping for today. They would be on the radio and television every single day shouting about the EU enforcing a blockade against the UK, trying to starve the British people, destroy it's economy and collectively punish the people of the UK.

And they would be right.

There is a significant proportion of the brexit cheerleaders who haven't thought at all about outcome or consequences or what their preferred options are, as long as it's wrapped in patriotism and nationalism and hatred of foreigners, they are perfectly capable of supporting any outcome. And this is truly frightening when we look at the not so distant history of violence on the European continent

Adamcp898

Hurrache wrote: »

The dumb thing is that it appears on their website for Irish subscribers to the Ireland edition. They really need to differentiate more between the 2 as currently the Ireland section for the daily publication is basically an add-on to the bottom of the UK edition landing page.

Somewhat of a contradiction, no?

You don't like them publishing political cartoons because you find them too subjective and an example of media outlets attempting to paint a crass picture of certain persons or events which may or may not be true (although it is a cartoon).

Yet you'd like them to also hide the cartoons from a certain portion of their readership based on geographical location.............so that they could be more disingenuous when it comes to the slant of their coverage??

Hurrache

Adamcp898 wrote: »

Somewhat of a contradiction, no?

You don't like them publishing political cartoons because you find them too subjective and an example of media outlets attempting to paint a crass picture of certain persons or events which may or may not be true (although it is a cartoon).

Yet you'd like them to also hide the cartoons from a certain portion of their readership based on geographical location.............so that they could be more disingenuous when it comes to the slant of their coverage??

I have no problem with them publishing political cartoons taking a pop at anyone.

However this cartoon cannot be said to be political, it's a basically a personal attack based on how Brexiters like to portray him, rather than actually on his politics.

I also didn't say I want them to hide it, I'm saying that when you log into the Times Ireland, the Irish coverage should be prominent first and foremost.

Dyr

I think it was a British PM that summed up these cartoons well ...it's better to be laughed at than ignored

Adamcp898

Hurrache wrote: »

I have no problem with them publishing political cartoons taking a pop at anyone.

However this cartoon cannot be said to be political, it's a basically a personal attack based on how Brexiters like to portray him, rather than actually on his politics.

I also didn't say I want them to hide it, I'm saying that when you log into the Times Ireland, the Irish coverage should be prominent first and foremost.

It's not a particularly good one no. Just reaches for the same British stereotypes of continental Europeans and makes them into a caricature - poor Luxembourg will never have one of it's own I doubt, unless they go for the stock accountant portrayals - but caricatures are rarely flattering of anyone, let alone in the context of politics and that's pretty much the same everywhere.

The Times Ireland Edition has always seemed somewhat of an afterthought imo, but if the damn cartoon wasn't to be found as easily as it is in the main edition then there'd be people here wringing their hands over how they're trying to dupe us all.

MrMusician18

Baron de Charlus wrote: »

I don't disagree that the EU is in need of reform. But I don't think the vote to leave was largely driven by that need for reform. A far larger factor was internal UK politics and discourse, where for 30-odd years the EU was used a convenient bogeyman and whipping boy.

What needs to reform? Much like Brexit, we all know what we don't want but when it comes to solutions, they're in short supply.

Professor Moriarty

Adamcp898 wrote: »

It's not a particularly good one no. Just reaches for the same British stereotypes of continental Europeans and makes them into a caricature - poor Luxembourg will never have one of it's own I doubt, unless they go for the stock accountant portrayals - but caricatures are rarely flattering of anyone, let alone in the context of politics and that's pretty much the same everywhere.

The Times Ireland Edition has always seemed somewhat of an afterthought imo, but if the damn cartoon wasn't to be found as easily as it is in the main edition then there'd be people here wringing their hands over how they're trying to dupe us all.

It was the British Press who came up with "Drunker Juncker". So the cartoon is just continuing the theme and dog whistling the stereotyping xenophobia that lies just beneath the surface in many elements of English society.

ancapailldorcha

MrMusician18 wrote: »

What needs to reform? Much like Brexit, we all know what we don't want but when it comes to solutions, they're in short supply.

I'm not saying it's perfect but "The EU needs reform" is something that got said a lot here by many remain voters with no elaboration.

Akrasia

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

I'm not saying it's perfect but "The EU needs reform" is something that got said a lot here by many remain voters with no elaboration.

This seems to sum up the remain campaign entirely. Reform the EU from within rather than pointing out the very real and very many tangible benefits of the EU.

The remain side should be selling the EU on it's benefits, not agreeing with the brexiteers on it's flaws

jmayo

prawnsambo wrote: »

Some of those aren't. Screwfix for example is way more expensive than most retailers or specialists here (as I found out when I recently bought a heating circulation pump - Screwfix were over 25% more).

I find screwfix cheaper on some things than some Irish retailers, but they are usually beaten by foreign imports.

prawnsambo wrote: »

The UK distributors are either setting up here or elsewhere in the EU and avoiding issues that way. Or the manufacturers are dropping them off the Ireland pipeline and giving it to Irish distributors. Tesco and M&S etc. are screwed. The likes of Dunnes, Musgraves, Aldi and Lidl have already dropped UK supply lines. A lot of contracts that would have been renewed in January, haven't. I know all this because I asked them.

Look up the MV Celine and its sister ship. Both tasked to Ireland and were never on the UK routes because (a) the Celine is new and (b) believe it or not, no UK port is deep enough for them.

Thanks for that info.
They will be operating between Dublin and Zeebrugge/Rotterdam.

I know some are saying Roscoff when they talk about increased links to Europe, but I can't see it being used for major traffic.

First Up wrote: »

Yes, and the Cork ferry (and another later this year) docks and unloads trucks there every week. I've also been to Cherbourg which receives about six ferries a week from Dublin and Rosslare.

What developments? We have three (soon four) ferries already operating to France and one to Spain from Dublin, Rosslare and Cork.

Roscoff is not a big port whereas yes Cherbourg is and is a lot closer to major locations in Europe.
Also 6 ferries a week is probably nowhere near enough if we are to bypass Britain.

Why does someone always include the mickie mouse twice a week link to Spain as some great solution ?
The ones that really suits are the guys hauling fish from Castletownbere to Vigo.

The current links to France are not adequate to cover all the current British land bridge traffic.
Now the above MC Celine and MV Delphine could take a big chunk of traffic direct from Netherlands/Belgium but how many trips a week can two ships do?

First Up wrote: »

It was delayed in production. Its here now.

Spoken like someone that wasn't screwed over by it's delayed delivery.
Would you give the same comment to a haulage company that was relying heavily on the delivery of a ship ?

prawnsambo wrote: »

I read those papers before. The one assumption he makes that cannot be made about the NI border is that everyone is going to automatically follow the rules.

Well, we know that won't happen. It's a smuggler's licence and in addition, the imposition of tariffs on goods going either way will make it a smuggler's paradise. As a customs officer was quoted as saying: "No technology can look inside vans".

There is other area that requires human interaction as mentioned this morning on radio and that is animal inspections.
Live animals coming into EU have to be inspected and movement between North and South is no longer trade but importation and that adds more qualifications.

As per EU website...

For importation, additional animal health requirements are set out in specific Commission Decisions. These lay down health certificates which must accompany all animal imports. In general, these certificates must be signed by an official veterinarian of the competent authority of the exporting non-EU country guaranteeing that the conditions for import into the EU have been met.

On arrival in the EU, the animals and the accompanying certificates must be verified and checked by EU official veterinarians at a designated Border Inspection Post (BIP). Further checks on the animals may also be carried out at the final destination.

Note the words designated Border inspection Post (BIP).

Not sure if Slab Murphy's farm is going to be one of them.

BTW I asked about Open Skies re UK and EU, what is the current situation on hard Brexit ?

eagle eye

Deleted User wrote:

How? The backstop removes a time limit on trade negotiations which is a big help for the UK.

They want out, the backstop means they are not out.

prawnsambo wrote:

How exactly does it do that?

It means that the EU remain in control for as long as the backstop lasts.

Calina wrote:

They asked for it to apply to the whole UK. Are you saying that even when we give them something they ask for it is wrong? Cos I don't get this.

As I have said all the major figures in UK politics at the present time are not capable of running a country. Agreeing to the backstop put them in their knees in negotiations.

Hurrache

I see Dominic Raab, after recently discovering the importance of some UK ports when it comes to importing goods and claiming that Vardakar leaks conversations to Briitish right wing rags, admitted yesterday that he hasn't read the Good Friday Agreement, a prerequisite one would expect given his role.