Brexit discussion thread IX (Please read OP before posting)

dr.fuzzenstein · 28-06-2019 10:44PM

Sand wrote: »

If the choice is between being an enthusiastic and full member of the EU, or being a "European North Korea" is there actually a genuine choice being presented to European electorates? If the choice is between X and being a "European North Korea" how much of the support of EU membership is genuine enthusiasm as opposed to fear of being an international pariah state?

The choice is binary for the UK because they made it that way.
The UK decided to leave, negotiated a WA and then got mired in infighting, incompetence and indecision.
And, though they have by no means any kind of majority, they hard-line Brexiteers seem to have managed to push their idiotic agenda, which is guided by dogma and insanity, to the forefront.
If the UK becomes the NK of Europe, it is because THEY went down that path.
They EU has remained fair and reasonable throughout this whole bloody farce.
The hardliners have managed to persuade the population that all the chaos, indecision and time wasting was the EU's fault, which is like playing a game of "stop hitting yourself" with someone and then blaming someone else for their injuries and they actually believe you!
You need the IQ of a spud to fall for this absolute nonsense.
Not an attack on you, but the Brexiteers are pulling a scam even dumber than the Nigerian 419 and people are falling for it by the millions.

Capt'n Midnight · 28-06-2019 10:49PM

Deleted User wrote: »

I have a feeling that Brexit hurried both this and the Japan deal along.

More like Trump and his undermining the Trans Pacific thingy

fash · 28-06-2019 11:10PM

Joe_ Public wrote: »

It's an interesting scenario, Caroline Flint i think it was who proposed something similar on QT last night. Have to say, personally, I would be against it on the grounds that I dont believe No Deal has any more right to be on the ballot paper than Remain has. It would seem to offer a good deal of closure on the issue, but not in any democratic sense i think. I just dont see anything democratic in a no deal outcome on that basis, no matter how loudly the no deal brexiteers harp on about it.

Also, i'm not sure procedurally how it would work. Getting the initial referendum through the house in 2016 took the guts of a year if i recall correctly. It has to be agreed by parliament, including the terms and wording of it, so seems to me you're just stuck in the same twisty maze where we are at present. Not sure i can see any out for any new PM in that.

True enough- the EU wouldn't give any time to the UK to have such a referendum

fash · 28-06-2019 11:20PM

Sand wrote: »

I think this is interesting. TBH, I think that the UK must go for no deal given the political mood in the country. The miscalculation amongst remainers in the UK and the wider EU is that the UK would at the 11th hour blink, and do anything to avoid a decline in their GDP potential. The miscalculation on the part of the Brexiteers has been that the EU will at the 11th hour blink, and do anything to avoid a decline in their GDP potential. The reality is that Brexiteers value Brexit above GDP, and the EU values the EU above GDP. There is a stubborn disbelief on both sides that the other could have a value system that exceeds the cult of GDP.

The only EU state that really has something on the live is Ireland. Aside from that, for the EU it is just a case of GDP - and of course making sure that you don't the equivalent of selling an iPod Touchs with all the functionality of an iPhone but at 1/5th the price.

What is interesting is that the deeper a member state of the EU integrates with the EU, a single system, the greater the chance of failure upon a single point. If the choice is between being an enthusiastic and full member of the EU, or being a "European North Korea" is there actually a genuine choice being presented to European electorates? If the choice is between X and being a "European North Korea" how much of the support of EU membership is genuine enthusiasm as opposed to fear of being an international pariah state?

Most of this comes down to the UK's history with Ireland. Other countries would have a cleaner break (although continental Schengen states would have to put up borders and possibly drop a currency).

Leroy42 · 28-06-2019 11:20PM

munstermagic11 wrote: »

Sand wrote: »

The reality is that Brexiteers value Brexit above GDP, and the EU values the EU above GDP. There is a stubborn disbelief on both sides that the other could have a value system that exceeds the cult of GDP.

The EU isn’t throwing the UK out, the UK is choosing to leave. The EU is trying to minimize the impact to the EU and it’s values due to someone else’s decision.
The unicorn requests from Brexiteers is to get a better deal than membership. What is the EU to do?
The stumbling block is NI, so the EU ask to the UK is how it leaves but still maintain the Good Friday Agreement that they signed up to.

The stumbling block is not NI. The stumbling block is that no Brexit is actually able to deliver what the Brexiteers wanted and promised and as such something most be held to blame.

The Irish, and the Irish border, is just that.

But even if, somehow by some weird act of self sabotage, the EU was to simply 'forget ' about both the NI border and the GFA, even then the UK is facing years of uncertainty, lack of FDI, lack of confidence and the continuing disintegration of the prevailing political set up.

Brexit is the symthom of the problems inherent in the UK not the cause. And no Brexit is going to solve it as fundamentally the EU is not the core problem.

54and56 · 29-06-2019 12:09AM

Joe_ Public wrote: »

It's an interesting scenario, Caroline Flint i think it was who proposed something similar on QT last night. Have to say, personally, I would be against it on the grounds that I dont believe No Deal has any more right to be on the ballot paper than Remain has. It would seem to offer a good deal of closure on the issue, but not in any democratic sense i think. I just dont see anything democratic in a no deal outcome on that basis, no matter how loudly the no deal brexiteers harp on about it.

Also, i'm not sure procedurally how it would work. Getting the initial referendum through the house in 2016 took the guts of a year if i recall correctly. It has to be agreed by parliament, including the terms and wording of it, so seems to me you're just stuck in the same twisty maze where we are at present. Not sure i can see any out for any new PM in that.

I can conceive of a scenario, post BoJo returning from Brussels with zero changes to the WA, where there are enough Brexit leaning Tory and Labor MPs such that a referendum offering the public a choice between a soft(er) Brexit such as TMs WA or a No Deal Brexit would garner enough support to pass the HoC as it would give all in favour the option of claiming they helped honour the 2016 referendum and deliver Brexit whilst giving "the people" the choice of what flavour Brexit they wanted.

CelticRambler · 29-06-2019 12:10AM

Sand wrote: »

What is interesting is that the deeper a member state of the EU integrates with the EU, a single system, the greater the chance of failure upon a single point. If the choice is between being an enthusiastic and full member of the EU, or being a "European North Korea" is there actually a genuine choice being presented to European electorates? If the choice is between X and being a "European North Korea" how much of the support of EU membership is genuine enthusiasm as opposed to fear of being an international pariah state?

There's plenty of choice for other European electorates - about 100 other models, in fact, worldwide and at least half a dozen different options within the geographical area commonly referred to as "Europe". But Theresa May decided that she was going to box the UK into a NK-style situation with her inherently unworkable red lines.

The single point of failure in all of this is the inability of disgruntled voters to appreciate and understand that everything they love about modern life is inherently dependent on polynational integration, more-or-less unfettered movement of people around the planet and a lot of mutually beneficial compromise agreements.

A Dub in Glasgo · 29-06-2019 12:14AM

Sand wrote: »

I think its the wrong answer to a genuine question

I am not even sure the genuine question asked is related to the EU

Strazdas · 29-06-2019 01:23AM

CelticRambler wrote: »

There's plenty of choice for other European electorates - about 100 other models, in fact, worldwide and at least half a dozen different options within the geographical area commonly referred to as "Europe". But Theresa May decided that she was going to box the UK into a NK-style situation with her inherently unworkable red lines.

The single point of failure in all of this is the inability of disgruntled voters to appreciate and understand that everything they love about modern life is inherently dependent on polynational integration, more-or-less unfettered movement of people around the planet and a lot of mutually beneficial compromise agreements.

The Brexit voters appear to be either incredibly stupid or to have been brainwashed by their lying press. They have swallowed the idea they can rip up 50 years worth of treaties and trade deals and somehow come out of this even better off. We're talking about the most deluded public in western Europe.

Stop moaning ffs · 29-06-2019 07:03AM

It was mentioned on remainiacs that the longer this rumbles on the happier Farage etc will be. Come the end of the year he might even be PM. We think he’d never want that responsibility he’d rather be a sh!tstirrer hurling from the ditch but the twisting endless limbo the uk finds itself in, with no signs of resolution, suits him and those backing him, down to the ground.

Enzokk · 29-06-2019 07:04AM

54&56 wrote: »

I can conceive of a scenario, post BoJo returning from Brussels with zero changes to the WA, where there are enough Brexit leaning Tory and Labor MPs such that a referendum offering the public a choice between a soft(er) Brexit such as TMs WA or a No Deal Brexit would garner enough support to pass the HoC as it would give all in favour the option of claiming they helped honour the 2016 referendum and deliver Brexit whilst giving "the people" the choice of what flavour Brexit they wanted.

If Brexit was the dumbest mistake the UK has done, a referendum between no-deal and May's deal would be 100 times dumber. You could have a majority spoil their ballots and write in Remain and that would be the most popular, but that would mean no-deal would win the referendum as more people would support it ahead of May's deal. This would be a cynical ploy for MP's to rid themselves of the responsibility of finding a deal that would satisfy a 52-48% result.

It is almost like those advocating for Brexit doesn't realize that if the result is this close it means a soft Brexit, one where they leave the EU but have a close relationship. It is the only deal that will have any chance of getting through parliament with cross party support and will as a result also cause the least damage. Norway voted to not join the EU on the same margin and look at their close relationship.

An Ciarraioch · 29-06-2019 08:39AM

Another excellent article by Tony Connelly on those Border plans - basically, no technical discussions between Dublin and Brussels at present, and formal, physical infrastructure would take years to erect in any event, but regular conversations are being held as to how Ireland is preparing to meet its Single Market obligations in the worst-case scenario:

https://www.rte.ie/news/analysis-and-comment/2019/0628/1059105-brexit-deal-border/

20silkcut · 29-06-2019 09:20AM

Capt'n Midnight wrote: »

Just a reminder of how long trade deals can take in the real world.

EU does a deal with South America.

Really when you look at that deal and how long it took to reach agreement and a further 8 years now to implement and you think that Britain is facing the prospect of tearing up every trade deal it is currently in at midnight on October 31st this year.
Just really makes you think no deal is an absolute fantasy. Certainly as a long term strategy it is utter la la land. No way Britain could tolerate unbalanced trade deals. It’s too diverse a country.
Trading blocs would absolutely tear Britain apart with relish if they were isolated in world trade suddenly like that on oct 31st.

trellheim · 29-06-2019 11:04AM

Reminder for all : the 2016 referendum made no binding commitment to implement the referendum.

See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Union_Referendum_Act_2015#The_Act

Only Theresa May on triggering A50 started any clock ticking

Anytime Brexiters mention the vote, this should be thrown back in their faces.

Akrasia · 29-06-2019 11:32AM

trellheim wrote: »

Reminder for all : the 2016 referendum made no binding commitment to implement the referendum.

See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Union_Referendum_Act_2015#The_Act

Only Theresa May on triggering A50 started any clock ticking

Anytime Brexiters mention the vote, this should be thrown back in their faces.

Also the fact that a UK Court found that the leave campaign acted so illegally that if the result was actually binding, they would have been forced to call a re-run of the vote. The only reason they didn't force a re-run was because the result wasn't actually binding.

https://www.lbc.co.uk/radio/presenters/james-obrien/brexit-referendum-corruptly-won-but-result-stands/

Lackadaisical · 29-06-2019 11:42AM

It sounds like we've one unbelievable mess coming up in October and realistically we don't have many options.

Leaving the EU isn't a sane option, as it would cause absolutely huge economic problems here.
The Tories don't seem to comprehend that they're offering us absolutely nothing other than some kind of vague suggestion that we could become somekind of powerless, de facto dependency or some mad fantasy that we just rejoin the UK, which is utterly politically unacceptable in a way they don't seem to even begin to understand.

Reimplementing the border will be seen in the North as a breech of the GFA and things will start to go crazy.

From a NI nationalist point of view though they also need to remember the long game. The Republic's strong economic footing is absolutely essential to any future United Ireland, so doing anything rash that causes a major mess here ultimately undermines the cause of of Irish unity.

It's going to be a mess and I'm not seeing any real solution.

Professor Moriarty · 29-06-2019 11:56AM

Lackadaisical wrote: »

It sounds like we've one unbelievable mess coming up in October and realistically we don't have many options.

Leaving the EU isn't a sane option, as it would cause absolutely huge economic problems here.
The Tories don't seem to comprehend that they're offering us absolutely nothing other than some kind of vague suggestion that we could become somekind of powerless, de facto dependency or some mad fantasy that we just rejoin the UK, which is utterly politically unacceptable in a way they don't seem to even begin to understand.

Reimplementing the border will be seen in the North as a breech of the GFA and things will start to go crazy.

From a NI nationalist point of view though they also need to remember the long game. The Republic's strong economic footing is absolutely essential to any future United Ireland, so doing anything rash that causes a major mess here ultimately undermines the cause of of Irish unity.

It's going to be a mess and I'm not seeing any real solution.

It's time to meet fire with fire. Everytime Johnson, Hunt, Mogg & Co threaten Ireland with tearing up the GFA and a hard border, Vradakar and Coveney should threaten to veto and hinder every single subsequent trade negotiation that benefits Britain.

Seth Brundle · 29-06-2019 12:45PM

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

It's time to meet fire with fire. Everytime Johnson, Hunt, Mogg & Co threaten Ireland with tearing up the GFA and a hard border, Vradakar and Coveney should threaten to veto and hinder every single subsequent trade negotiation that benefits Britain.

If the leave with no deal then they are the ones walking away from an internationally recognised agreement. They also will come to the EU looking for a deal with little to offer in return. They will be the ones at a disadvantage and they will know it.
If we start threatening them now it will do us absolutely no good.

Professor Moriarty · 29-06-2019 12:59PM

Seth Brundle wrote: »

If the leave with no deal then they are the ones walking away from an internationally recognised agreement. They also will come to the EU looking for a deal with little to offer in return. They will be the ones at a disadvantage and they will know it.
If we start threatening them now it will do us absolutely no good.

Maybe, maybe not. It might concentrate Brexiteer minds if it were implicitly made clear that if they mess us around then we will mess them around. Subservient acquiescence, or the appearance of, only emboldens them. At any and all bilateral meetings between the Irish and the British, I would be very clear that our future goodwill in trade negotiations between the EU and Britain should not be taken for granted.

29-06-2019 01:05PM

I see that Irish farmers are a bit pissed off with the new EU deal with several south American countries.

https://www.rte.ie/news/world/2019/0628/1059112-eu-mercosur-trade-deal-what-you-need-to-know/

Earlier this week the IFA president, Joe Healy, said the deal is a sellout of EU values.

He said it is reckless of the European Commission to agree to a trade deal that would see tens of thousands of tonnes of substandard beef from Brazil and other South American countries come into the European market.

Is this any worse than a possible UK US deal after Brexit?

Seth Brundle · 29-06-2019 01:11PM

[Deleted User] wrote: »

I see that Irish farmers are a bit pissed off with the new EU deal with several south American countries.

https://www.rte.ie/news/world/2019/0628/1059112-eu-mercosur-trade-deal-what-you-need-to-know/

Is this any worse than a possible UK US deal after Brexit?

How? It isn't allowing imports of beef or any other products that don't meet EU standards.

Capt'n Midnight · 29-06-2019 01:27PM

fash wrote: »

Most of this comes down to the UK's history with Ireland. Other countries would have a cleaner break (although continental Schengen states would have to put up borders and possibly drop a currency).

For the currency thing we pegged our currency to the Sterling for ages.

These countries are pegged to the Euro as are Bosnia and Herzegovina, and Bulgaria.

There's also the countries in the ERM and or signed up to join the Euro.

Joe_ Public · 29-06-2019 01:39PM

Deleted User wrote: »

I see that Irish farmers are a bit pissed off with the new EU deal with several south American countries.

https://www.rte.ie/news/world/2019/0628/1059112-eu-mercosur-trade-deal-what-you-need-to-know/

Is this any worse than a possible UK US deal after Brexit?

Maybe this deal has some disadvantages for us, but not sure we were in much of a position to be getting precious about our interests given we will likely need a lot more EU goodwill over the coming months. Tough on Irish farmers maybe, but there's a bigger picture here perhaps.

BluePlanet · 29-06-2019 01:50PM

Deleted User wrote: »

I see that Irish farmers are a bit pissed off with the new EU deal with several south American countries.

Is this any worse than a possible UK US deal after Brexit?

Inaccurate bluster by a interested party that wants to restrict competition to protect their own pocket book.

Strazdas · 29-06-2019 02:25PM

Joe_ Public wrote: »

Maybe this deal has some disadvantages for us, but not sure we were in much of a position to be getting precious about our interests given we will likely need a lot more EU goodwill over the coming months. Tough on Irish farmers maybe, but there's a bigger picture here perhaps.

I've heard talk Ireland should veto the deal.....that would be an insane move given the current political situation

Besides, there may be many plus points to the Mercosur deal for Irish businesses. We export a hell of a lot more products apart from beef.

20silkcut · 29-06-2019 02:56PM

Strazdas wrote: »

I've heard talk Ireland should veto the deal.....that would be an insane move given the current political situation

Besides, there may be many plus points to the Mercosur deal for Irish businesses. We export a hell of a lot more products apart from beef.

I think it’s more the double standards that is the issue here. Traceability, protection of the environment place huge restrictive regulations on European farmers. Now there will be beef on the shelves in Europe that does not adhere to any such restriction. Basically the EU is saying yes we are fine with importing beef that has no traceability and is produced in countries that destroy rainforests and habitats to produce it. It’s a bit rich.
Really proves that all this environmental stuff is just virtue signaling posturing and that money and trade is all that matters at the back of it all.
A prime example of real politik.

Farm to fork carbon neutral what does that mean now??

Lackadaisical · 29-06-2019 02:56PM

France is hugely concerned about it. So there'll still be a long way to go on that deal yet.

https://www.politico.eu/article/macron-and-3-others-warn-mercosur-deal-could-destabilize-farm-sector/

54and56 · 29-06-2019 03:24PM

Deleted User wrote: »

I see that Irish farmers are a bit pissed off with the new EU deal with several south American countries.

https://www.rte.ie/news/world/2019/0628/1059112-eu-mercosur-trade-deal-what-you-need-to-know/

Is this any worse than a possible UK US deal after Brexit?

Its a standard enough protectionist response from the industry body, they've no choice but to complain otherwise their members would wonder what they are paying the leadership for but the bottom line is trade deals are always give and take. If the amount of beef is limited in volume and must meet the same high standards as locally produced beef it won't put the local producers at an economic disadvantage. If they can't produce a KG of beef at a competitive price relative to an equally high quality produced South American KG of beef which has the additional bureaucratic cost of being exported into and shipped to the EU our local producers need to up their game.

Funny how our farmers love being able to export but don't like it when farmers in other countries want to do the same :rolleyes:

Leroy42 · 29-06-2019 03:35PM

Or could it be that only the meat that meets the regs isxalliwed? Would be very strange that the EU just ignore their own regulations.

At the least it would probably be on the basis of improving standards over time with early access to help fund the change.

But back to Brexit, it shows that the EU is growing and targeting the very markets that brexit is based on getting to reduce the impact.

Whatever about the EU having to reduce standards, what are the UK going to do?

murphaph · 29-06-2019 04:12PM

Seth Brundle wrote: »

How? It isn't allowing imports of beef or any other products that don't meet EU standards.

Yep, exactly. You can already buy beef from Uruguay or Argentina in my local German supermarket. The EU stations its own inspectors in these plants to oversee the process.

Ireland exports a lot more than beef these days and there's nothing stopping Irish beef being shipped to south America as a premium product just as it is in Germany.

Brexit discussion thread IX (Please read OP before posting)

Comments