Brexit discussion thread VII (Please read OP before posting)

RobMc59 · 14-02-2019 3:20pm

Imreoir2 wrote: »

Assuming that the UK does not remain, what do you want to happen in that scenario?

I'd like the UK to stay as close as possible to the EU in all matters-historically and geographically Europe is Britain's best and closest friends and allies-we don't always see eye to eye but isn't it like that occasionally with friends?

Leroy42 · 14-02-2019 3:21pm

RobMc59 wrote: »

I'd like the UK to stay as close as possible to the EU in all matters-historically and geographically Europe is Britain's best and closest friends and allies-we don't always see eye to eye but isn't it like that occasionally with friends?

So TM's deal then?

An Ciarraioch · 14-02-2019 3:22pm

Macy0161 wrote: »

Corbyn's plan already solves the backstop issue. A customs union means no need for the backstop.

If anything, regulatory alignment is more important to eliminating the backstop than the customs union is.

EKRIUQ · 14-02-2019 3:24pm

Is this what's really going to happen in the next 5 weeks?

May will delay a vote until the last couple of days before March 29th and probably lose the vote then look for an extension from the EU which will be granted and then kick the can some more unless the EU folds. (The extension will be seen as a victory for Brexitors as the EU are afraid of the UK leaving)

I don't think public opinion has changed very little in the UK if anything gotten stronger since in their eyes the EU is bullying the UK and in Mays eyes a delivery of a no deal brexit is better than none i.e. remain.

RobMc59 · 14-02-2019 3:26pm

Leroy42 wrote: »

What?

Fanciful nonsense? So you dismiss all the economic forecasts even though in large part they are starting to happen? That jobs are being lost. Investment is way down. The Pound has devalued yet no apparent increase in exports?

Do you think the ideas being put forward about the possible issues with transport and shipping is simply made up? Even though the UK government itself has entered into contracts for additional ferry services. They have stockpiled medicines. They have planned truck parking sites.

You are preaching to the converted-but it's the constant no deal mad max garbage I find irritating-just as mention of "someone's going to blink" irritates people(including me!)

eagle eye · 14-02-2019 3:26pm

LuckyLloyd wrote:

Again, there is a clear trend in both types of polls (right / wrong; remain / leave). The information is self evident, not exactly difficult to interpret. Opinion has changed, and remain is a constant defined concept or position. "Leave" has never been and it's negotiated definition, i.e. the Withdrawal Agreement, seems to be dissatisfactory for Leavers.

I don't remember seeing anything in your post about polls for all variants. The only thing I seen was the right or wrong decision ones which for me are what we should be looking at and there isn't a majority for either side in any of them. It's very close in most of them.

BonnieSituation · 14-02-2019 3:26pm

RobMc59 wrote: »

I'd like the UK to stay as close as possible to the EU in all matters-historically and geographically Europe is Britain's best and closest friends and allies-we don't always see eye to eye but isn't it like that occasionally with friends?

So in the EU then?

Irish Praetorian · 14-02-2019 3:30pm

EKRIUQ wrote: »

I don't think public opinion has changed very little in the UK if anything gotten stronger since in their eyes the EU is bullying the UK and in Mays eyes a delivery of a no deal brexit is better than none i.e. remain.

I see people saying this a lot, often backing it up with ancedotal evidence about how "everyone I talk to who voted remain now wants to leave", but is there any actual evidence for this? From an examination of post referendum polling there has been a continous shift towards people thinking brexit was the wrong decision and saying they would vote remain in a hypothetical second referendum. If I might offer some anecdotal evidence of my own, even on programmes like question time which people point to as evidence for various opinions, I cant help but observe that even the biggest cheers of leave tend to only involve half the audience. Im led to suspect people arent shifting opinions but rather they are getting nosier.

Folkstonian · 14-02-2019 3:30pm

RobMc59 wrote: »

I'd like the UK to stay as close as possible to the EU in all matters-historically and geographically Europe is Britain's best and closest friends and allies-we don't always see eye to eye but isn't it like that occasionally with friends?

The trouble with trying to express warmth in this manner, is that it’s all lovely but it doesn’t actually mean anything. What does staying as close as possible to the EU actually mean to you in real terms?

My main concern with May’s deal is that it puts foreign, defence and trade policies in a straight jacket, tightened or loosened at Europe’s discretion, for no discernible financial or constitutional benefit.

If you are going to go through the turbulence of leaving the EU, is it ever worth it if all you are going towards as an end state is EU member by other means?

RobMc59 · 14-02-2019 3:32pm

BonnieSituation wrote: »

So in the EU then?

I don't proffess to understand everything about brexit but a customs union sounds reasonable although not as good as remaining-correct me if I'm wrong but isn't the May deal a temporary arrangement?

RobMc59 · 14-02-2019 3:39pm

Folkstonian wrote: »

The trouble with trying to express warmth in this manner, is that it’s all lovely but it doesn’t actually mean anything. What does staying as close as possible to the EU actually mean to you in real terms?

My main concern with May’s deal is that it puts foreign, defence and trade policies in a straigh jacket, tightened or loosened at Europe’s discretion, for no discernible financial or constitutional benefit.

If you are going to go through the turbulence of leaving the EU, is it ever worth it if all you are going towards as an end state is EU member by other means?

I don't want the UK to leave the EU-as I've said I don't swallow everything they say but still think remaining is best for Britain.
In terms of defence,Britain punches well above its weight but is not a super power-looking after Britain and it's interests is more important to me than squaring up to russia or China imo.

ancapailldorcha · 14-02-2019 3:42pm

RobMc59 wrote: »

I agree,the likes of Mogg and co.are bringing Britain to the brink of ruin and personally (perhaps forlornly now)would like article 50 revoked.
I do think each country within the EU has its own agenda though and as a remainer genuinely hope the EU remains united as I have no desire for the TM deal to be accepted.

The EU's not going to crumble at the last minute. It's hammered out literally dozens of deals. The Irish border issue was placed front and centre and the backstop is a British solution.

The only issue I worry about on that specific issue is how much help the Irish will get, if any to actually create and enforce the infrastructure for the border.

Panrich · 14-02-2019 3:43pm

Speech by Oliver Letwin (Con) now saying that the HoC MUST take charge as it looks like the PM will take the country out of the EU without a deal. He is saying that a concensus will now have to emerge from across the house to prevent this. It sounds as if this time they might mean what they are saying.

Zubeneschamali · 14-02-2019 3:44pm

EKRIUQ wrote: »

May will delay a vote until the last couple of days before March 29th and probably lose the vote then look for an extension from the EU which will be granted

If the WA passes, the EU will grant an extension to get all the needed legislation in place in the UK, but if it is rejected, I think they are they are out on the 29th with No Deal.

That's why May is trying this, because by threatening No Deal, she gets them to vote for her deal, since a bad deal is apparently better than No Deal.

Who would have guessed?

demfad · 14-02-2019 3:46pm

listermint wrote: »

This is an incredibly interesting feed from Carole Cadwalladr the only journalist who continues to look at foreign involvement in this entire mess with the backing of Senior Tory Party Members and insiders .

As i said all along, there is Russian Money awash in this mess and disaster capitalists are in glee. The only people going to get absolutely hammered is the working man/woman

https://twitter.com/carolecadwalla/status/1095821913094524928

To be fair, Irish Journalist Peter Geoghan covered a lot of this a year ago:

https://www.opendemocracy.net/David-Burnside-Putin-Russia-DUP-Brexit-Donaldson-Vincent-Tchenguiz

The assumption was that the Russians had a campaign to infiltrate UK conservatives (as with US conservatives) using big money etc.

PR agencies with connected ex politicians are good ways to do this as the PR company would know most of the current political players.

So 'Manafort, Stone and Black' in the US.

'New century media' was Burnsides PR company and he seems to have been the man to connect Tory politicians with Russian Billionaire (and Russian Spies as we will see).

Dmitri Firtash was Manafort's employer in Ukraine and it looks like Firtash actually owns New Century Media.

From the Commons committee on Fake news:

https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201719/cmselect/cmcumeds/363/36308.htm#_idTextAnchor033

Another email links Arron Banks with Alexander Nekrassov, a former Kremlin and government adviser:

I have been in touch with Alexander Nekrassov and he is willing to help us from any angle in the Leave campaign. I realise he is a controversial, outspoken person and that there may be some clash of personalities. However, if managed well, he could be a valuable asset to the campaign.223

Note: see corrigendum regarding the below paragraph

180.Mr Nekrassov is also Director of Financial Services of New Century Media. New Century Media’s Chairman is David Burnside, who was previously a Democratic Unionist Party (DUP) (*should be UUP) MP and who has had close connections with Vincent Tchenguiz, who himself used to be the largest shareholder in SCL.224

NOTE: Alexander Nekrassov holds a Senior position in New Century Media.

Burnside is connected to Russian money flowing into Tories, to Cambridge Analytica. Look at this other quote from the Opendemocracy link:

In 2012, Burnside invited Sergey Nalobin, the senior diplomat from the Russian embassy in London, to a Tory fundraising dinner. Nalobin, whose father was a top-ranking officer in the FSB, the successor agency to the Soviet KGB, was forced out of the UK by the Home Office in 2015

And From this Guardian report:
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/nov/04/brexit-ministers-spy-russia-uk-brexit

But the Conservative Friends of Russia was not what it seemed, and nor was Nalobin. A series of reports by the Guardian’s Luke Harding and others revealed that Nalobin was intimately connected to the FSB, and that the Conservative Friends of Russia was a Moscow influence operation.

Also:

Matthew Elliott has never made his association with the Conservative Friends of Russia public. In 2012, he was not publicly known. Since the referendum, he has launched a new organisation, Brexit Central, and the Times reported last week that he was being lined up for a senior role at the head of the party – most likely vice-chairman, as a reassuring “signal of intent on Brexit” for the hardliners.
But photographs from 2012 reveal that he was a founding member of the group and later that year went on a 10-day trip to Moscow with all expenses paid by the Russian government.

Burnside likely has connections to the DUP dark money.
His company is owned by his client Firtash who was Manaforts oligarch handler.
Another client was the head of SCL (parent of Cambridge Analytica).
A Russian boss in Burnside's media company was offering any help Banks wanted in the referendum.
Burnside brings Nabolin into Tory circles.
Nabolin sets up Conservative Friends of Russia with Matthew Elliot (went on to lead Vote Leave).

I think Bill Browder's summation explains the almost total silence on this in Britain:

“London is one of the main outposts for Russian financial and political influence programmes in the west. It’s floating on a tide of dirty money. All the oligarchs have bases there. They all have homes. All the professional service firms are in London – lawyers, investigations agencies – all running private influence ops on behalf of the oligarchs who are working on behalf of Putin. There’s a huge reluctance in Britain to strangle the golden goose. Because a lot of people very close the centre of power are financially benefiting.”

Just to add: We have the St Petersburg IRA and RT/Sputnik all over Brexit.
We have the Russian influence on the Tories.
Russian money potentially 8 million to Banks and .5 million via DUP.
Missing is evidence of Russian interference on main campaigning (Facebook).
That's because FB point black refuse to give that information to the Commons Fake news Committee.

Edit: We also have Cambridge Analytica and Aggregate IQ all over Brexit.
AIQ was viewed as just another CA department or the Canadian SCL office until 2016.
CA is being heavily investigated in the Mueller investigation.

listermint · 14-02-2019 4:39pm

Folkstonian wrote: »

The trouble with trying to express warmth in this manner, is that it’s all lovely but it doesn’t actually mean anything. What does staying as close as possible to the EU actually mean to you in real terms?

My main concern with May’s deal is that it puts foreign, defence and trade policies in a straight jacket, tightened or loosened at Russia's discretion, for no discernible financial or constitutional benefit.

If you are going to go through the turbulence of leaving the EU, is it ever worth it if all you are going towards being controlled by a Russian Led Tory party with extensive considerable russian backing of all the key players.

Fixed that for you, and frankly surprised you are not the remotest concerned about it.

nor the free for all disaster capitalism that will take root over the next few years

BonnieSituation · 14-02-2019 4:44pm

demfad wrote: »

To be fair, Irish Journalist Peter Geoghan covered a lot of this a year ago:

https://www.opendemocracy.net/David-Burnside-Putin-Russia-DUP-Brexit-Donaldson-Vincent-Tchenguiz

The assumption was that the Russians had a campaign to infiltrate UK conservatives as with US conservatives using big money etc.

PR agencies with connected ex politicians are good ways to do this as the PR company would know most of the current political players.

So Manafort, Stone and Black in the US.

New century media was Burnsides group and he seems to have been the man to connect Tory politicians with Billionaire Russians.

Dmitri Firtash was Manaforts employer in Ukraine and it looks like Firtash actually owns New Century Media.

From the Commons committee on Fake news:

https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201719/cmselect/cmcumeds/363/36308.htm#_idTextAnchor033

Burnside is connected to Russian money flowing into Tories, to Cambridge Analytica. Look at this other quote from the Opendemocracy link abover:

And From this Guardian report:

Also:

Burnside likely has connections to the DUP dark money.
His company is owned by his client Firtash who was Manaforts oligarch handler.
Another client was the head of SCL (parent of Cambridge Analytica).
A Russian boss in Burnside's media company was offering any help Banks wanted in the referendum.
Burnside brings Nabolin into Tory circles.
Nabolin sets up Conservative Friends of Russia with Matthew Elliot (went on to lead Vote Leave).

I think Bill Browder's summation explains the almost total silence on this in Britain:

Just to add: We have the St Petersburg IRA and RT/Sputnik all over Brexit.
We have the Russian influence on the Tories.
Russian money potentially 8 million to Banks and .5 million via DUP.
Missing is evidence of Russian interference on main campaigning (Facebook).
That's because FB point black refuse to give that information to the Commons Fake news Committee.

Demfad, you're like our very own Cadwalladr in here.

Keep up the good work. Love reading your synopses.

Bit cynical · 14-02-2019 5:49pm

EKRIUQ wrote: »

May will delay a vote until the last couple of days before March 29th and probably lose the vote then look for an extension from the EU which will be granted and then kick the can some more unless the EU folds. (The extension will be seen as a victory for Brexitors as the EU are afraid of the UK leaving)

Not sure about that. The extension is being used as a threat by May against the Brexiteers - vote for my deal or else face a delay in Brexit. An extension is something the Brexiters are trying to avoid.

An Ciarraioch · 14-02-2019 5:56pm

Aviva moves €9 billion in EU assets to Ireland, expected, but bizarre that it seems to have gone largely under the radar:

https://www.irishtimes.com/business/financial-services/aviva-moves-9bn-in-assets-to-dublin-amid-intensifying-brexit-uncertainty-1.3793709?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter

LuckyLloyd · 14-02-2019 6:01pm

One of the Brexit ministers speaking in the Commons there and asked whether the UK government have drafted a legal text representing changes they desire to the current backstop. Answer a mealy mouthed "No".

The amendments being debated today are irrelevant imo.

An Ciarraioch · 14-02-2019 6:06pm

So, Soubry withdraws hers, on the understanding that the government will publish the reports, and ERG abstention means a likely May defeat on the main motion.

Enzokk · 14-02-2019 6:38pm

Macy0161 wrote: »

Corbyn's plan already solves the backstop issue. A customs union means no need for the backstop.

Not really, or at least not most of it. To solve the border issue you have two ways, either BRINO (customs union and single market membership with the 4 freedoms) or you have an Irish Sea border. Just having a customs union does not on its own solve the backstop or border issue.

Inquitus · 14-02-2019 6:44pm

Seems the Government lost their pointless motion:

"That this House welcomes the prime minister’s statement of 12 February 2019; reiterates its support for the approach to leaving the EU expressed by this House on 29 January 2019 and notes that discussions between the UK and the EU on the Northern Ireland backstop are ongoing."

MPs have delivered a blow to May’s authority by rejecting her Brexit motion by 303 votes to 258 - a majority of 45.

Hurrache · 14-02-2019 6:54pm

It's a meaningless vote, but the optics are terrible when they potentially may ask for an extension and the EU are looking to see if there's a majority for anything the government may propose before they do.

She can't be seen to have a mandate for anything she goes back to the EU with.

Professor Moriarty · 14-02-2019 6:55pm

Inquitus wrote: »

Seems the Government lost their pointless motion:

"That this House welcomes the prime minister’s statement of 12 February 2019; reiterates its support for the approach to leaving the EU expressed by this House on 29 January 2019 and notes that discussions between the UK and the EU on the Northern Ireland backstop are ongoing."

MPs have delivered a blow to May’s authority by rejecting her Brexit motion by 303 votes to 258 - a majority of 45.

And so, when you are sitting across the negotiating table from Theresa May, why on Earth would you agree to any concession knowing that her parliament won't support her anyway.

Spanish Eyes · 14-02-2019 7:03pm

On another note, does anyone think that Ireland may be shafted by the EU with harmonisation of tax rates, specifically Corporate Tax rates, as a quid pro quo for their support for us re Brexit?

I note Victor Orban's Hungary has a CT rate of 9%. I doubt he would be happy with harmonisation either.

Just wondered what you all might think.

Will any (every) country have a veto? I am wondering about that.

cml387 · 14-02-2019 7:04pm

Not really anything new about this. It just adds to the widespread belief that TM has absolutely no power over events now.

Incidentally, those who believe that the Germans are wobbling will have cold comfort from a report on Today this morning.

I may paraphrase slightly, but the report signed off with the observation that, often in these things you will hear behind the public statements that there are voices in Germany that are looking to compromise on the backstop, but in this case from what she could determine, there were none.

RobertKK · 14-02-2019 7:07pm

The only thing they agree on in Westminster is they still disagree.

The worst run country in the west.

kunst nugget · 14-02-2019 7:11pm

Spanish Eyes wrote: »

On another note, does anyone think that Ireland may be shafted by the EU with harmonisation of tax rates, specifically Corporate Tax rates, as a quid pro quo for their support for us re Brexit?

I note Victor Orban's Hungary has a CT rate of 9%. I doubt he would be happy with harmonisation either.

Just wondered what you all might think.

Will any (every) country have a veto? I am wondering about that.

If we were the only country not in favour of tax harmonisation, then we might be in difficulty but there's others that would veto it as well like Hungary as you've mentioned and the Netherlands so I don't really see it being a major issue in the next couple of years.

Tell me how · 14-02-2019 7:16pm

Spanish Eyes wrote: »

On another note, does anyone think that Ireland may be shafted by the EU with harmonisation of tax rates, specifically Corporate Tax rates, as a quid pro quo for their support for us re Brexit?

I note Victor Orban's Hungary has a CT rate of 9%. I doubt he would be happy with harmonisation either.

Just wondered what you all might think.

Will any (every) country have a veto? I am wondering about that.

Certain people (Macron) is a strong proponent of tax harmonisation.

I suspect that Ireland will come under some pressure in future and that some voices will say it is payback for support now but I suspect those voices will be as much trying to stir discontent rather than come from within the EU.

I'm not familiar with the details of it at this point but I think that we could have a veto on such tax harmonisation being implemented. Don't quote me on that, it's likely to be much more nuanced than that.

We will lose the sense that we had a strong neighbour whose thoughts and desires were often (but not always) aligned with our own. But, this does not mean that we are going to be bullied from here on.

Brexit discussion thread VII (Please read OP before posting)

Comments