Brexit discussion thread VIII (Please read OP before posting)

seamus · 01-04-2019 01:56PM

Spook_ie wrote: »

At the end of the day it just means a different market appearing, whether that be a less consumer driven market and making things actually have a meaningful lifespan, as is likely to emerge in the UK or a throw away society as is present at the moment in the EU and USA generally remains to be seen.

Tbh, this is just flowery language being used to rehash, "The UK survived the war, it can survive this".

You're basically saying it's OK, people will get used to having a lower standard of living and making do without the luxuries they currently enjoy.

Which is true. But the problem is that most of our economies are based on producing and selling luxuries to one another.

If we all got bombed back to the stone age, we could say that people will make do, they will light fire and grow and hunt their own food. But that's taking blind optimism to a place of denial.

Schnitzler Hiyori Geta · 01-04-2019 02:03PM

Robert McGrath wrote: »

No, of course not. I’m just saying if you’re going to criticise the Brexiter side, criticise them for the right thing. What yer man said was inaccurate, but he didn’t contradict himself within 6 seconds as was implied above

Spook_ie wrote: »

As in most countries they would import what they could afford, the fact that their import/export market would probably shrink doesn't mean they lost/won a trade war.

At the end of the day it just means a different market appearing, whether that be a less consumer driven market and making things actually have a meaningful lifespan, as is likely to emerge in the UK or a throw away society as is present at the moment in the EU and USA generally remains to be seen.

Come on now... do you genuinely believe that when that person was making the statement they were implying either of these things? The only meaning without doing some serious mental gymnastics is that he believes the UK's importation of EU goods means the UK has the EU over the barrel, not taking into consideration the impact on the UK itself or any potential knock-on issues.

Schnitzler Hiyori Geta · 01-04-2019 02:05PM

josip wrote: »

When I said 'it's best that they leave', I meant, 'it's best for the EU that they leave.
The EU has to look after its own citizens.
All those you listed are UK citizens and it's the responsibility of HMG to look after their interests, not the EU's responsibility.

Isn't that kind of one of the main points of the EU?

Jim2007 · 01-04-2019 02:11PM

Leroy42 wrote: »

Maybe call it a 3 year extension (so as to avoid having to revoke A50 and the public outrage that will cause), where everything stays at it currently is. UK remains a full member, partakes in EU elections, pays into the EU budget and plays a full and active role. During this time the UK continues on with its internal dialogue about the EU and tries, through a series of ref's, to come to some sort of consensus.

Absolutely not. There is no benefit to the EU to have this kind of nonsense continuing, we need to draw a line under this one way or another and move on to address all the other issues that are of concern to the people of the EU.

ancapailldorcha · 01-04-2019 02:11PM

josip wrote: »

When I said 'it's best that they leave', I meant, 'it's best for the EU that they leave.
The EU has to look after its own citizens.

The UK dismantling and selling itself off in project Singapore-on-Thames doesn't benefit the EU one bit. Nor does a major European military power becoming ever more right wing.

josip wrote: »

All those you listed are UK citizens and it's the responsibility of HMG to look after their interests, not the EU's responsibility.

EU migrants are EU migrants. Some have citizenship, some do not.

Shelga · 01-04-2019 02:16PM

I can’t see the point in the EU granting a long extension with no plan from the UK.

I hope the Irish government has plans on how to help/subsidise beef farmers here in the case of no deal, because the likelihood of it is extremely high.

Will there be a school of thought in the EU council at the moment that crashing out is better for them in some ways, long term?

ancapailldorcha · 01-04-2019 02:21PM

Shelga wrote: »

I can’t see the point in the EU granting a long extension with no plan from the UK.

I hope the Irish government has plans on how to help/subsidise beef farmers here in the case of no deal, because the likelihood of it is extremely high.

Will there be a school of thought in the EU council at the moment that crashing out is better for them in some ways, long term?

I think the government's been quite active in helping Irish firms establish a presence on the continent. Don't have a link offhand though.

Crashing out hurts the EU as well. The UK isn't a huge market. Last figure I saw was the UK taking 6% of EU exports though that's not nothing either. The best outcome short of cancelling Brexit is the closest alignment of the UK and the EU possible.

Unfortunately, Theresa May decided to trap herself in her red lines.

Laois_Man · 01-04-2019 02:27PM

Shelga wrote: »

I can’t see the point in the EU granting a long extension with no plan from the UK.

There's no question of an extension being granted without a plan from the UK.

But today MIGHT see one emerge - even if Theresa May disapproves of it.

Otherwise a suspension of matters until after the HoC agrees to a General Election and a new Government is formed is the only thing that can realistically happen as far as I can see - and the HoC wouldn't agree to a General Election until after Theresa May announces she is stepping down as Tory leader!

Shelga · 01-04-2019 02:31PM

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

I think the government's been quite active in helping Irish firms establish a presence on the continent. Don't have a link offhand though.

Crashing out hurts the EU as well. The UK isn't a huge market. Last figure I saw was the UK taking 6% of EU exports though that's not nothing either. The best outcome short of cancelling Brexit is the closest alignment of the UK and the EU possible.

Unfortunately, Theresa May decided to trap herself in her red lines.

Cancelling Brexit is best for the EU, close alignment with a customs union/single market is second best- but aren't we beyond that now?

Interesting article in the Financial Times about why the EU will not be keen on more extensions: https://www.ft.com/content/b4965046-524f-11e9-9c76-bf4a0ce37d49

The UK is 3 days past the point of original exit, and 11 days away from the extended exit day, and is only now holding indicative votes about what way they'd like to proceed, with no majority for anything. The situation is looking increasingly hopeless. We all know what makes the most sense, but I think the period where either of the two most favourable options could happen has passed.

At least in a no deal exit, the UK will be forced to come to its senses quickly. The EU holds all of the cards in such a situation. With a long extension, this creates more and more uncertainty and instability, and the risk of Eurosceptic candidates running for election.

If I was head of the European Council, I would be seriously considering refusing an extension to the UK for anything other than a referendum (which is also awful in lots of ways, but so is everything now). An extension for a general election solves nothing. An extension just to argue amongst themselves more is pointless.

2nd referendum, revoke article 50, or no deal. The choice is yours.

01-04-2019 02:34PM

seamus wrote: »

Tbh, this is just flowery language being used to rehash, "The UK survived the war, it can survive this".

You're basically saying it's OK, people will get used to having a lower standard of living and making do without the luxuries they currently enjoy.

Which is true. But the problem is that most of our economies are based on producing and selling luxuries to one another.

If we all got bombed back to the stone age, we could say that people will make do, they will light fire and grow and hunt their own food. But that's taking blind optimism to a place of denial.

Planned obsolescence and excessive consumerism are the greatest risks to the environment short of nuclear war, but these are nothing to do with Brexit.

For many leave voters, a rebellion against globalization was part of the reason they want to leave the EU. The EU representing many of the features of globalization that puts some people at a disadvantage as big business brings in cheap labour to deny them a career and export's the profit to another country to avoid tax.
The fear of a federal US of Europe, led by Germany was also a great fear amongst many leave voters as well.
Just calling them racist bigots, is simply avoiding the reasons many voted the way they did.

Laois_Man · 01-04-2019 02:39PM

Shelga wrote: »

An extension for a general election solves nothing.

People keep saying this and I don't agree. It's hard to know for sure but I'd be fairly confident in a prediction that it would be a Labour or Lib Dems/SNP with a healthy majority coalition at the end of it and that's a very different scenario.

The elimination of the DUP as the holders of the balance of power on it's own would make a big difference but wouldn't solve everything if the Tory's got back in. But unless they get a majority on their own, you can forget that. Nobody other than the DUP would go near them!

If the Tory's had any sense, they would de-select ERG members which would also help - but that won't happen!

ancapailldorcha · 01-04-2019 02:39PM

Shelga wrote: »

Cancelling Brexit is best for the EU, close alignment with a customs union/single market is second best- but aren't we beyond that now?

Interesting article in the Financial Times about why the EU will not be keen on more extensions: https://www.ft.com/content/b4965046-524f-11e9-9c76-bf4a0ce37d49

The UK is 3 days past the point of original exit, and 11 days away from the extended exit day, and is only now holding indicative votes about what way they'd like to proceed, with no majority for anything. The situation is looking increasingly hopeless. We all know what makes the most sense, but I think the period where either of the two most favourable options could happen has passed.

At least in a no deal exit, the UK will be forced to come to its senses quickly. The EU holds all of the cards in such a situation. With a long extension, this creates more and more uncertainty and instability, and the risk of Eurosceptic candidates running for election.

If I was head of the European Council, I would be seriously considering refusing an extension to the UK for anything other than a referendum (which is also awful in lots of ways, but so is everything now). An extension for a general election solves nothing. An extension just to argue amongst themselves more is pointless.

2nd referendum, revoke article 50, or no deal. The choice is yours.

If anything, cancelling Brexit is more likely than ever.

The deal is dead. She might try to bring it back again but nobody wants it. We'll have a better idea later tonight but as far as I am concerned, all we're waiting for is an extension to facilitate a GE/People's Vote from the EU and for Politicians to become brave enough to vote through a second referendum.

Nobody wants no deal save for the fanatics. Even the DUP are seeing sense and saying they'd prefer Remain to undermining the Union they purport to value above all else. Remainers meanwhile keep denigrating the "Norway option" as if it were a bad thing though in fairness it is objectively inferior to the status quo.

Deleted User wrote: »

Planned obsolescence and excessive consumerism are the greatest risks to the environment short of nuclear war, but these are nothing to do with Brexit.

For many leave voters, a rebellion against globalization was part of the reason they want to leave the EU. The EU representing many of the features of globalization that puts some people at a disadvantage as big business brings in cheap labour to deny them a career and export's the profit to another country to avoid tax.
The fear of a federal US of Europe, led by Germany was also a great fear amongst many leave voters as well.
Just calling them racist bigots, is simply avoiding the reasons many voted the way they did.

Leave voters voted against Globalization.

I see no issue with the assessment save for the fact that they're in for a shock when they see that that's what Dominic Raab has in mind for British workers whom he considers lazy.

First Up · 01-04-2019 02:48PM

Deleted User wrote:

For many leave voters, a rebellion against globalization was part of the reason they want to leave the EU. The EU representing many of the features of globalization that puts some people at a disadvantage as big business brings in cheap labour to deny them a career and export's the profit to another country to avoid tax. The fear of a federal US of Europe, led by Germany was also a great fear amongst many leave voters as well. Just calling them racist bigots, is simply avoiding the reasons many voted the way they did.

A guy interviewed on BBC said he voted Leave to make schools and hospitals better and to reduce street crime.

When asked why he blamed the EU for these things he said he blamed the government.

With that sort of incisive thinking, you really have to wonder.

Russman · 01-04-2019 02:59PM

If it’s actually true that 13 ministers favour no-deal, they could be past the point of no return.
If she wanted to, can the PM do anything to precipitate a no-deal crash out, apart from winding the clock down and letting it happen by default ? Is their a nuclear option for a hard core brexiteer, or can the HoC do anything to actively stop it ?
I’m just thinking of the two scenarios where she might throw a strop and decide f—k it, we’re out, or where the clock gets to an hour before the deadline, can the house instruct her to revoke ?

Professor Moriarty · 01-04-2019 02:59PM

Labour to back a Norway Plus model of staying in the SM and CU tonight. If Bercow allows it, of course. It will be down to Tory MPs as to whether it's accepted or not. MPs won't be whipped except for the cabinet who are instructed not to vote. Personally, I could see cabinet members defying the whip. If they do and/or if Norway Plus is accepted, I think the band aid keeping the Tory party together will finally fall off.

Anteayer · 01-04-2019 03:00PM

Sterling traders seem to be responding to every nuance of the debate, rather optimistically, the currency is going like a yoyo at the moment. It's really starting to become a pain in the rear to do business with the UK as there's a lot of fluctuation. Where possible, I'm not signing contracts in £.

Infini · 01-04-2019 03:05PM

Anteayer wrote: »

Sterling traders seem to be responding to every nuance of the debate, rather optimistically, the currency is going like a yoyo at the moment. It's really starting to become a pain in the rear to do business with the UK as there's a lot of fluctuation. Where possible, I'm not signing contracts in £.

Honestly the currencys been holdin in the mid 80s for the last few weeks.There wont be much of a significant shift unless either Abandon Brexit occurs which would trigger a rally or no deal occurs which triggers a major selloff.

Laois_Man · 01-04-2019 03:06PM

Russman wrote: »

can the HoC do anything to actively stop it ?

If the indicative votes find a majority on something tonight, Standing order 14 can be invoked to have it passed as legislation whether Theresa May or her ministers like it or not.

badtoro · 01-04-2019 03:07PM

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

josip wrote: »

My problem with this is that the UK's role within, and impact on, the EU is toxic and malignant.
Even more so since they invoked article 50.
It's best that they leave.

So the people that voted to stay, those who've realised the folly of their decision, EU migrants here, Irish farmers and exporters and those who couldn't vote should just be thrown under the bus?

I'm an Irish farmer and I think the UK should leave, for the good of the EU. I see no way how the UK's internal omnishambles can be healed in the short or medium term. From the education to political systems, to the media and peoples own ignorance. I genuinely fear a remaining UK with a malcontent government could actually do more serious damage to the EU than Brexit.

Pardon the financial pun, but Irish farmers need to focus on where their pounds are coming from rather than fretting over the pennies.

Leroy42 · 01-04-2019 03:07PM

Deleted User wrote: »

For many leave voters, a rebellion against globalization was part of the reason they want to leave the EU. The EU representing many of the features of globalization that puts some people at a disadvantage as big business brings in cheap labour to deny them a career and export's the profit to another country to avoid tax.
The fear of a federal US of Europe, led by Germany was also a great fear amongst many leave voters as well.
Just calling them racist bigots, is simply avoiding the reasons many voted the way they did.

And since, and if people are being honest with themselves actually before, the ref people were made aware that it is not the EU that is the cause of this, any more than it was Obama fault that coal was dying out in the US.

But certainly since the Ref the many lies about and blaming of the EU have been exposed yet there is a very significant number of people that simply want out.

So the question is why? Is it because of the Euro, well no. Is it because of food banks or knife crime? Again no. So what is it. What is it thata people are willing, in fact calling for, economic negatives for at the very least the short term. There must be something.

And that something, however you want to dress it up, is all based around England for the English. Our laws, our taxes, our leaders, our people.

Balanadan · 01-04-2019 03:15PM

Anteayer wrote: »

Sterling traders seem to be responding to every nuance of the debate, rather optimistically, the currency is going like a yoyo at the moment. It's really starting to become a pain in the rear to do business with the UK as there's a lot of fluctuation. Where possible, I'm not signing contracts in £.

Between the currency risk and the risk of tariffs in the event of no deal, we're holding off on doing new business with companies in the UK, only purchasing for confirmed orders or when we see value. We're ready to shift a lot of purchasing out of the UK to other European countries.

Professor Moriarty · 01-04-2019 03:15PM

badtoro wrote: »

I'm an Irish farmer and I think the UK should leave, for the good of the EU. I see no way how the UK's internal omnishambles can be healed in the short or medium term. From the education to political systems, to the media and peoples own ignorance. I genuinely fear a remaining UK with a malcontent government could actually do more serious damage to the EU than Brexit.

Pardon the financial pun, but Irish farmers need to focus on where their pounds are coming from rather than fretting over the pennies.

The IFA and the ICMSA have a different perspective. 'Armageddon', 'devastation' and 'disaster' are just a few of the words they use to describe Brexit.

Seth Brundle · 01-04-2019 03:16PM

DUP will be sticking to their position on the WA and CM2.0...

https://twitter.com/BBCPolitics/status/1112716902395072512

Professor Moriarty · 01-04-2019 03:17PM

Seth Brundle wrote: »

DUP will be sticking to their position on the WA and CM2.0...

https://twitter.com/BBCPolitics/status/1112716902395072512

They want a Hard Brexit. They just don't have the guts to say so.

Water John · 01-04-2019 03:23PM

Great to see Lb backing Norway +, pity DUP didn't follow. It should garnish a good few Tory votes also.

badtoro · 01-04-2019 03:31PM

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

badtoro wrote: »

I'm an Irish farmer and I think the UK should leave, for the good of the EU. I see no way how the UK's internal omnishambles can be healed in the short or medium term. From the education to political systems, to the media and peoples own ignorance. I genuinely fear a remaining UK with a malcontent government could actually do more serious damage to the EU than Brexit.

Pardon the financial pun, but Irish farmers need to focus on where their pounds are coming from rather than fretting over the pennies.

The IFA and the ICMSA have a different perspective. 'Armageddon', 'devastation' and 'disaster' are just a few of the words they use to describe Brexit.

Yes and no. Farming has been brainwashed into this "production" narrative. From the supposedly neutral advisory side, to the representative side, to the political side. The feeding of the 9 billion by 2050 nonsense etc. Production in and of itself is hugely expensive, concrete and steel, and worse again shiny steel (machinery). Bad planning and policy primarily to make politicians look good and keep farmers in a subservient doff your cap position has led to what seems like a constant feed and income crisis.

What I'm getting at is farmers have allowed themselves to be led down the garden path at huge personal cost, by people who do not have their interests at heart. Until, particularly the low income farmers who are in the vast majority, start to invest in some critical thinking they will stay as they are, in the dark, being fed sh1t.

As for the first crowd you mention they don't even represent the majority of their own members. If you want proof of that look into the last CAP, how they fought against redistribution which would have benefitted most farmers rather than fewer, and watch what they do in the next CAP.

Water John · 01-04-2019 03:36PM

Peston is putting Norway + at 307 For 253 Against.

VinLieger · 01-04-2019 03:42PM

Water John wrote: »

Peston is putting Norway + at 307 For 253 Against.

But havent Norway and the rest of EFTA basically said they don't want to let the UK in because they are afraid of them messing it up?

BobbyBobberson · 01-04-2019 03:43PM

VinLieger wrote: »

But havent Norway and the rest of EFTA basically said they don't want to let the UK in because they are afraid of them messing it up?

Certainly heavily hinted at didnt they? Imagine seeing the burning wreck that is the UK and them knocking at the door asking to come in. My god.

tuxy · 01-04-2019 03:44PM

VinLieger wrote: »

But havent Norway and the rest of EFTA basically said they don't want to let the UK in because they are afraid of them messing it up?

They have, I think it would have to be a different agreement between the EU and UK but based on that model for it to work.

Brexit discussion thread VIII (Please read OP before posting)

Comments