Brexit discussion thread VIII (Please read OP before posting)

ShooterSF · 20-03-2019 12:38AM

Inquitus wrote: »

That's never going to happen thankfully. If there is a 2nd referendum remain will most certainly be on the ballot.

Probably so but it doesn't take away from it feeling like it is cheating the public if there is only one option for brexit on the ballot. They were asked did they want out and said yes. Now that question was grossly ambiguous and has led to most of the problems in parliament as all different shapes and sizes of brexit have been sought after. To go back to the public and not have the core of the vote be how they want to leave but rather, it's this deal or we cancel the whole thing seems like trying to narrow the support for brexit to only those in favour of May's deal and disengage some of those who want a more extreme brexit to try and overturn the whole situation.

If it was in Ireland and I was anti Europe I'd be a lil peeved after voting to leave to get only to vote on a deal or not leaving.

recedite · 20-03-2019 12:39AM

LeinsterDub wrote: »

10 days to go and people are still throwing out this absolute nonsense

10 days to go, and people here in RoI still complaining that the UK has not capitulated yet to the EU imposed pre-conditions.

Ignoring the fact that we are currently facing trade tariffs for all beef and dairy products heading east to the UK, and an EU imposed hard border to the north to prevent all the zero tariffed goods coming south from the UK and NI into the single market.

Varadkar has gambled the future of this country in a pointless endeavour to achieve a frictionless border by threatening the neighbours instead of being nice to them.

ShooterSF · 20-03-2019 12:42AM

recedite wrote: »

10 days to go, and people here in RoI still complaining that the UK has not capitulated yet to the EU imposed pre-conditions.

Ignoring the fact that we are currently facing trade tariffs for all beef and dairy products heading east to the UK, and an EU imposed hard border to the north to prevent all the zero tariffed goods coming south from the UK and NI into the single market.

Varadkar has gambled the future of this country in a pointless endeavour to achieve a frictionless border by threatening the neighbours instead of being nice to them.

Not really EU imposed is it? If the UK leave the EU and we stay in ther has to be a border based on international rules as is my understanding. Not the EU's fault the UK wants to leave and can't pass the very deal they agreed to. It is why when the Irish govenment came out months ago saying they had no plan for a border I was intensely annoyed with them. You're the government and should know the old adage failing to prepare is preparing to fail.

Panrich · 20-03-2019 12:44AM

recedite wrote: »

10 days to go, and people here in RoI still complaining that the UK has not capitulated yet to the EU imposed pre-conditions.

Ignoring the fact that we are currently facing trade tariffs for all beef and dairy products heading east to the UK, and an EU imposed hard border to the north to prevent all the zero tariffed goods coming south from the UK and NI into the single market.

Varadkar has gambled the future of this country in a pointless endeavour to achieve a frictionless border by threatening the neighbours instead of being nice to them.

Mays red lines and failure to build a cross party consensus is why we’re at this stage. Stop deluding yourself.

Laois_Man · 20-03-2019 12:46AM

Panrich wrote: »

Mays red lines and failure to build a cross party consensus is why we’re at this stage. Stop deluding yourself.

They haven't even built a Tory party consensus never mind a cross-party consensus!

FrancieBrady · 20-03-2019 12:47AM

recedite wrote: »

10 days to go, and people here in RoI still complaining that the UK has not capitulated yet to the EU imposed pre-conditions.

Ignoring the fact that we are currently facing trade tariffs for all beef and dairy products heading east to the UK, and an EU imposed hard border to the north to prevent all the zero tariffed goods coming south from the UK and NI into the single market.

Varadkar has gambled the future of this country in a pointless endeavour to achieve a frictionless border by threatening the neighbours instead of being nice to them.

The UK gambled with everyone's future including their own, we just reacted to that in the only way we could.

Roger_007 · 20-03-2019 12:47AM

recedite wrote: »

...............

Varadkar has gambled the future of this country in a pointless endeavour to achieve a frictionless border by threatening the neighbours instead of being nice to them.

Unfortunately the neighbors are a totally disfunctional family who used to live in the 'big house' and could never get used to the idea that they now have to muck in with the people they used to regard as their inferiors.

recedite · 20-03-2019 12:49AM

bobmalooka wrote: »

Last sentence already redundant, UK published their proposed tariff system and de facto sea border last week.

Am aware of that, but lets say (hypothetically) Brexit went ahead on the day as scheduled.
Merkel might then tell Varadkar to get back in his box, as the whole idea of the WA and the backstop veto would immediately become redundant.
All attention would turn to the future relationship between the UK and the EU. No preconditions.
It would be in everybody's interest to announce an immediate Free Trade transition period. UK would then drop its proposed tariffs on beef and dairy, and it would commit to retain full harmonisation with the single market during the transition. This period could be used then to negotiate the Future Relationship and the actual trade deal, which negotiations would start in earnest immediately.

Evd-Burner · 20-03-2019 12:53AM

recedite wrote: »

Am aware of that, but lets say (hypothetically) Brexit went ahead on the day as scheduled.
Merkel might then tell Varadkar to get back in his box, as the whole idea of the WA and the backstop veto would immediately become redundant.
All attention would turn to the future relationship between the UK and the EU. No preconditions.
It would be in everybody's interest to announce an immediate Free Trade transition period. UK would then drop its proposed tariffs on beef and dairy, and it would commit to retain full harmonisation with the single market during the transition. This period could be used then to negotiate the Future Relationship and the actual trade deal, which negotiations would start in earnest immediately.

It's a good thing we have a veto on future trade agreements, isn't it?

AlmightyCushion · 20-03-2019 12:56AM

Evd-Burner wrote: »

It's a good thing we have a veto on future trade agreements, isn't it?

Didn't you hear Merkel is going to tell us to get back in our box. Just like we've been told she would do at some stage over the past few years. Just you wait and see.

recedite · 20-03-2019 01:01AM

Evd-Burner wrote: »

It's a good thing we have a veto on future trade agreements, isn't it?

Indeed we could use that veto and do a DeValera, preferring trade war with our neighbours to co-operation.
Learn to live under a blockade, hemmed in by a hard sea border to the east and a hard land border to the north.

Joe_ Public · 20-03-2019 01:03AM

Listening to Blair on newsnight almost made me forget his war crimes and wish he was there now to get his country through this crisis which i believe he would. How slick and confident he was in the face, i thought, of some bizarre questions from the usually spot on Emily Maitliss.

Shelga · 20-03-2019 01:21AM

Joe_ Public wrote: »

Listening to Blair on newsnight almost made me forget his war crimes and wish he was there now to get his country through this crisis which i believe he would. How slick and confident he was in the face, i thought, of some bizarre questions from the usually spot on Emily Maitliss.

I thought that too. Blair was the last real leader the UK had. He speaks decisively and lays out the options clearly, and he has that undefinable leadership charisma that May would give her right arm for. I liked how he swiftly dismissed Emily Maitliss’s stupid question about turning to faith in these times.

Sadly, 400,000 dead Iraqi civilians have rightfully destroyed his legacy forever.

Imreoir2 · 20-03-2019 01:29AM

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

UK economy looking strong with unemployment falling below 4% stats showed today.

More economic ammunition for the Brexiters.

Brexit not having any real negative effect on the numbers so far.

I heard the argument recently that the healthy employment rates are actually a symptom of an economey gripped by uncertainty. Given a choice between capital investment to improve efficiency and producitivity or increased staffing levels which allow for greater output at the cost of lower prodcuitivity, companies are opting for increased staff because they are worried about their assets being stranded if they invest in tech. Staff can easily be cut and replaced elsewhere should the need arise.

20-03-2019 01:37AM

Had beers last night with a Welsh friend. Brexit had never come up before, and I was surprised that he was like all my other British friends, ok with crashing out for totally vague and odd reasons. "The elite" etc.

He said he'd rather stay but the ambivalence to it all I really have trouble understanding.

Imreoir2 · 20-03-2019 01:39AM

recedite wrote: »

Am aware of that, but lets say (hypothetically) Brexit went ahead on the day as scheduled.
Merkel might then tell Varadkar to get back in his box, as the whole idea of the WA and the backstop veto would immediately become redundant.

And Varadkar might well turn around and ask Merkel who the hell she thinks she is to talk to another head of government like that. Fortunatly the rest of the EU do not act like a bunch of school children, and unlike the British political class do not feel the need to be needlessly provocative. Ireland has a cast iron veto on any future trade deal the EU makes with the UK, stronger in legal terms than the veto the EU gave us over the withdrawl agreement. You can be sure that there will be no posibility of any deal being done for as long as the UK is in breach of its obligations under the GFA. Implementing the backstop would remain a precondition for any talks on a future trade arangement.

robindch · 20-03-2019 01:40AM

Shelga wrote: »

Sadly, 400,000 dead Iraqi civilians have rightfully destroyed his legacy forever.

Blair has apologized for this, so would it be worth leaving him speak on a single topic when he's saying something worth listening to without dragging in the same issue all the time?

robindch · 20-03-2019 01:43AM

Deleted User wrote: »

He said he'd rather stay but the ambivalence to it all I really have trouble understanding.

Comes from a lack of information about what the EU does and how it now underpins so much of the day-to-day life of the UK.

Populism is well-known for boiling down complicated to simple, single and wrong answers.

Shelga · 20-03-2019 01:46AM

robindch wrote: »

Blair has apologized for this, so would it be worth leaving him speak on a single topic when he's saying something worth listening to without dragging in the same issue all the time?

No apology would ever be sufficient, IMO. And Brexiters would have a very valid point in saying that Iraq was one instance where he messed up massively, so why should we trust his opinion on Brexit. It’s relevant, whether you like it or not. It shows his judgement is not perfect, to say the least.

Plus he just seems to piss off a large percentage of Leavers and Remainers, by popping up constantly. I get why he speaks up, and he definitely has something to add, but I’m not sure it’s always helpful.

blackwhite · 20-03-2019 01:47AM

ballsymchugh wrote: »

Farage isn't a member of any party at the moment, and given that the UK elect MEPs on a list system, unless he forms something pretty fast, or UKIP take him back in, he probably won't be back.
there will be a few complete nutjobs though, UKIP have absorbed a few 'filthy articles' since the referendum

Is he not now a member of the imaginatively titled “Brexit Party”?

robindch · 20-03-2019 01:53AM

recedite wrote: »

10 days to go, and people here in RoI still complaining that the UK has not capitulated yet to the EU imposed pre-conditions.

It was the UK and Ireland who signed the GFA, not the EU, so it remains the responsibility of both signatories to keep an open border until such time as both signatories agree that it should be otherwise.

recedite wrote: »

Ignoring the fact that we are currently facing trade tariffs for all beef and dairy products heading east to the UK, and an EU imposed hard border to the north to prevent all the zero tariffed goods coming south from the UK and NI into the single market.

Where there are tariff differences and no border, then criminals - which Northern Ireland has in abundance - will flourish selling items from low-tariff zones into high-tariff zones. One can hardly blame the EU and Ireland for wanting to cut down on criminal activity, even if ERG and DUP policy wish to facilitate it.

recedite wrote: »

Varadkar has gambled the future of this country in a pointless endeavour to achieve a frictionless border by threatening the neighbours instead of being nice to them.

You may not fully understand how borders, tariffs and criminals interact - see above.

Joe_ Public · 20-03-2019 01:57AM

Shelga wrote: »

No apology would ever be sufficient, IMO. And Brexiters would have a very valid point in saying that Iraq was one instance where he messed up massively, so why should we trust his opinion on Brexit. It’s relevant, whether you like it or not. It shows his judgement is not perfect, to say the least.

Plus he just seems to piss off a large percentage of Leavers and Remainers, by popping up constantly. I get why he speaks up, and he definitely has something to add, but I’m not sure it’s always helpful.

I think you’re right on that. No matter how succinctly he condenses the issues, or how much common sense he brings to the discussion, there’ll be a rump of people who will totally dismiss him out of hand simply for who he is. Said it himself tonight, the pm and her party have been c***ing it up for 2 years and yet as soon as Blair sticks his nose in, its all his fault. Ends up being divisive simply by default.
Alastair Campbell was on last week and probably for the first time ever I found myself vigorously nodding my head at everything he said. Never honestly thought I’d see that day.

robindch · 20-03-2019 01:57AM

Shelga wrote: »

And Brexiters would have a very valid point in saying that Iraq was one instance where he messed up massively, so why should we trust his opinion on Brexit.

Brexiters are on thin ice indeed accusing others of gross incompetence or destroying their country's reputation.

sabat · 20-03-2019 02:00AM

recedite wrote: »

Varadkar has gambled the future of this country in a pointless endeavour to achieve a frictionless border by threatening the neighbours instead of being nice to them.

Priti Patel threatened Ireland's food supply - an actual war crime under the Geneva Convention. JRM, David Davies and others have on several occasions directly threatened the Irish economy. Can you link to any instance of Varadkar threatening the UK? And I don't mean when he just restated the same laws and policies the EU has always had.

robindch · 20-03-2019 02:02AM

Joe_ Public wrote: »

Ends up being divisive simply by default.

Indeed - because most people who disagree with Blair know that all they have to do to discredit him is to mention Iraq.

No reply needed to the issue at hand - just blanket finger-pointing and a complete lack of engagement - not that Brexiter debating policy is anything different to start with.

Peregrinus · 20-03-2019 02:10AM

robindch wrote: »

Indeed - because most people who disagree with Blair know that all they have to do to discredit him is to mention Iraq.

No reply needed to the issue at hand - just blanket finger-pointing and a complete lack of engagement - not that Brexiter debating policy is anything different to start with.

And the moral is, if you have an idea to advance, for the love of God don't recruit Tony Blair to advance it.

Blair's appalling wrongess about Iraq does not mean that all his views on every subject are appallingly wrong. But it does mean that he is an appalling advocate for any subject.

robindch · 20-03-2019 02:13AM

ShooterSF wrote: »

If the UK leave the EU and we stay in ther has to be a border based on international rules as is my understanding.

Well, yes. One (specious) Brexiter arguments is that the UK needs an "independent trade policy" so that it can "sign trade deals" with other countries.

On the surface, that's quite reasonable - why would the EU block national governments making trade deals with other countries?

For a very simple reason - because there's a customs' union (CU) which means that anything that enters into one CU country can automatically be forwarded onto another country without paperwork, since the regulatory and tariff rules are all the same.

This means that trade arrangements much be negotiated at EU level, not at country level, else you'd get Italy signing a trade deal with, say, Abyssinia to import bananas at zero percent duty while Spain's trade deal with Abyssinia might duty them at 50% - immediately creating an opportunity to smuggle stuff from Italy to Spain and cream off the 50% difference - unless there's a border in place which is capable of assessing duty on bananas.

Multiply that by every border times every product in a modern economy and you've got a mountain of paperwork and a huge custom's infrastructure which essentially is there to assess tax and stop smuggling.

I don't know how many of TM's cabinet are aware of how international trade works - there seems to be some fairly startling gaps in their knowledge - though whether that's through incompetence or dishonesty is open to question.

robindch · 20-03-2019 02:14AM

Peregrinus wrote: »

And the moral is, if you have an idea to advance, for the love of God don't recruit Tony Blair to advance it.

I don't disagree with that either - and that's why nobody seems to be asking him to do too much these days.

Still, though, it would be nice for a change to leave him say something without the usually dull thud of "But, but Iraq!" from those excellent people who might find his points otherwise unanswerable.

Peregrinus · 20-03-2019 02:17AM

recedite wrote: »

Am aware of that, but lets say (hypothetically) Brexit went ahead on the day as scheduled.
Merkel might then tell Varadkar to get back in his box, as the whole idea of the WA and the backstop veto would immediately become redundant.
All attention would turn to the future relationship between the UK and the EU. No preconditions.
It would be in everybody's interest to announce an immediate Free Trade transition period. UK would then drop its proposed tariffs on beef and dairy, and it would commit to retain full harmonisation with the single market during the transition. This period could be used then to negotiate the Future Relationship and the actual trade deal, which negotiations would start in earnest immediately.

This is absurd. The EU's objectives and priorities do not miraculously dissolve on Brexit day. The reasons why the EU considers citizens rights, financial obligations and the Irish border to be important do not suddenly evaporate, and if they currently want those things addressed in any Withdrawal Agreement, then in ten days time they still want them addressed in any Future Relationship Agreement.

The promise of an EU volte-face is a standard Brexiter line, but it makes about as much sense as "They need us more than we need them!" and "the German auto industry will gallop to the rescue!". I have yet to see any Brexiter offer a coherent explanation of why the EU should suddenly stop caring about the things that it cares about.

It's just a variant of "They always blink at the last minute!" This time it's "They'll blink just after the last minute!" The claim is that the EU will pay a huge price for not abandoning its priorities (in the form of not getting Withdrawal Agreement) but, having paid that price, will then abandon them. This is pure wishful thinking. And that's being polite about it.

RickBlaine · 20-03-2019 02:26AM

I think there is a subset of people who voted for Brexit that believe it will allow the UK fix all of its problems in the same way that some Trump voters thought about the border wall.

The wall and Brexit are both attempting to address very complex issues with overly simple solutions, and after the voting have been counted and the cold hard facts of politics and the real world come to bare, it starts becoming increasingly obvious that they voted for an unobtainable fantasy.

Brexit discussion thread VIII (Please read OP before posting)

Comments