Brexit discussion thread IX (Please read OP before posting)

joeysoap · 04-07-2019 1:15am

Rabb again saying (Peston ) there will be no customs on the border. Farrage also interviewed. UK tv is very slanted at the moment, Peston did his best but with such lob sided guests ...........

Pablo Escobar · 04-07-2019 6:27am

johnnyskeleton wrote: »

Perhaps, as Fintan O'Toole rather pithily remarkes before, in retrospect the EU should've said they absolutely refuse to give the UK a withdrawal agreement with a backstop, and should have insisted that the UK get no deal. Then all the Brexit supporters would be demanding the backstop and claiming that refusing to give them the backstop was bullying

The EU have to be seen to be as accommodating as possible during the process. I do think that the EU are done now though. There's no chance they'll get the French to roll over again and I don't think it's in anyone's long-term interest anyway.

otnomart · 04-07-2019 6:48am

George Osborne 'aiming for new role as head of IMF'

https://www.theguardian.com/business/2019/jul/04/george-osborne-aiming-for-new-role-as-head-of-imf

Peregrinus · 04-07-2019 7:00am

There's a speculative theory that BJ's plan is basically this:

1. Indicate appetite for no-deal Brexit in order to get elected as Tory leader.

2. But no-deal Brexit would be a disaster. He doesn't want to wear the political cost of being the PM who implements it.

3. One way out of this is if EU caves, agrees to talks on alternative to the backstop. This seems wildly unlikely to happen, and lets assume BJ is capable of seeing this. So what's plan B for not having to deliver a no-deal Brexit?

4. Lots of people recognise that it would be disaster, and will seek to avert it. If they are successful, it's win-win; he doesn't wear the costs of being the PM who implemented no-deal, and he also doesn't wear the costs of being the Tory leader who bottled on no-deal.

5. So if he can engineer matters so that he is seen to be moving towards no-deal Brexit, but is stopped by Other Forces, that would be nice.

6. There is a majority in the HoC that is opposed to no deal, but so far they have been too gutless to wear the political consequences of acting decisively to prevent it. Trick is to act in a way that stiffens the resolve of this majority, so they will act, so he doesn't have to.

7. Best prospect of being stopped by Other Forces is if those opposed to no-deal, including civil society organisations, industry bodies, trade unions, etc. get increasingly vocal, and HoC gets increasingly spooked. The more determined he seems to be to act in a way that will bring on no deal, and the more oblivious he pretends to be to the consequences, the more others will think no deal is a real possibility, and they must speak/act to prevent it. Hence his present rhetoric. Expect him to ramp it up signficantly once the Tory leadership contest is over, and he's installed, and the only way to stop him is for HoC to act. At that point the purpose of ramping it up will be to convince the HoC that they have to act to stop him.

It's a "stop me before I kill again!" strategy, basically.

Akrasia · 04-07-2019 8:50am

Loafing Oaf wrote: »

But it won't be tomorrow. I'd imagine if Brexit is resolved by the time of the election most of those Brexit Party votes would 'return' to the Tories.

Your imagination is all well and good, but brexit isn't going anywhere for a long time.

L1011 · 04-07-2019 8:52am

otnomart wrote: »

George Osborne 'aiming for new role as head of IMF'

https://www.theguardian.com/business/2019/jul/04/george-osborne-aiming-for-new-role-as-head-of-imf

Does he realise they'll make him give up his 5 other jobs?

Peregrinus · 04-07-2019 9:21am

Akrasia wrote: »

Your imagination is all well and good, but brexit isn't going anywhere for a long time.

Brexit isn't going away, but the kind of passion that sustains a huge vote for a single-issue party may well recede. Once Brexit has formally happened, on any terms at all, I can't see a future for the Brexit party as movement attracting mass voting support.

It's a mistake to think, though, that the votes that leave the Brexit party will "go back" to the Tory party. In the first place, they didn't all come from the Tory party. In the second place, I think the Tory party has done real, long-term damage to itself through the colossal ineptitude with which they have prosecuted the Brexit project. This is visible not only to all the Remainers, but to most Brexiters as well. Once a rusted-on voting preference for the Tory party has been shattered, I don't think it will automatically reassert itself. I think as the Brexit party declines there'll be a lot of votes up for grabs.

jem · 04-07-2019 10:36am

Problem at this stage Brexit has become dam near a religion with many in the uk and England in particular.
They feel that the are being bullied ( they aren't)
They feel that if they change course they will be the laughing stock of the world(opposite the case)
Many hark back to the days of the Empire and the British bulldog era ( its long gone)
The main leaders of the hard brexit are exceptionally wealthy and wouldnt matter a dam to them. ( the ordinary brexiteer being led by the nose by them)
A serious amount of the english actually dont give a dam about Scotland or Ireland and in reality see them as vassel states at best.
The Labour party is stuck with a leader the MP's dont want and the electorate wont vote for.
He is also and always has been anti EU.

I personally believe that if Labour could actually ditch Corburn and put say H Benn in as leader there would be a huge change in UK.The problem here is the party member vote and the momentum group in particular who are by and large extreme left win pro corburn.
I think Benn would cobble together a vote for a new referendum which while close would vote to remain IMHO.
Labour would win the next General election whether before or after a referendum.

I can honestly see a General Election before October 31 and under Borris and Corburn Tories dropping seats, Labour dropping seats , Bexit party and Lib Dems going up.

MrMusician18 · 04-07-2019 10:37am

Peregrinus wrote: »

Brexit isn't going away, but the kind of passion that sustains a huge vote for a single-issue party may well recede. Once Brexit has formally happened, on any terms at all, I can't see a future for the Brexit party as movement attracting mass voting support.

It's a mistake to think, though, that the votes that leave the Brexit party will "go back" to the Tory party. In the first place, they didn't all come from the Tory party. In the second place, I think the Tory party has done real, long-term damage to itself through the colossal ineptitude with which they have prosecuted the Brexit project. This is visible not only to all the Remainers, but to most Brexiters as well. Once a rusted-on voting preference for the Tory party has been shattered, I don't think it will automatically reassert itself. I think as the Brexit party declines there'll be a lot of votes up for grabs.

The Brexit party hasn't been tested in an election that the British care about though, so its hard to make a statement on their true level of support yet.

trellheim · 04-07-2019 10:55am

Peregrinus wrote: »

There's a speculative theory that BJ's plan is basically this:

1. Indicate appetite for no-deal Brexit in order to get elected as Tory leader.

2. But no-deal Brexit would be a disaster. He doesn't want to wear the political cost of being the PM who implements it.

3. One way out of this is if EU caves, agrees to talks on alternative to the backstop. This seems wildly unlikely to happen, and lets assume BJ is capable of seeing this. So what's plan B for not having to deliver a no-deal Brexit?

4. Lots of people recognise that it would be disaster, and will seek to avert it. If they are successful, it's win-win; he doesn't wear the costs of being the PM who implemented no-deal, and he also doesn't wear the costs of being the Tory leader who bottled on no-deal.

5. So if he can engineer matters so that he is seen to be moving towards no-deal Brexit, but is stopped by Other Forces, that would be nice.

6. There is a majority in the HoC that is opposed to no deal, but so far they have been too gutless to wear the political consequences of acting decisively to prevent it. Trick is to act in a way that stiffens the resolve of this majority, so they will act, so he doesn't have to.

7. Best prospect of being stopped by Other Forces is if those opposed to no-deal, including civil society organisations, industry bodies, trade unions, etc. get increasingly vocal, and HoC gets increasingly spooked. The more determined he seems to be to act in a way that will bring on no deal, and the more oblivious he pretends to be to the consequences, the more others will think no deal is a real possibility, and they must speak/act to prevent it. Hence his present rhetoric. Expect him to ramp it up signficantly once the Tory leadership contest is over, and he's installed, and the only way to stop him is for HoC to act. At that point the purpose of ramping it up will be to convince the HoC that they have to act to stop him.

It's a "stop me before I kill again!" strategy, basically.

THat last line made me chuckle Theres a word/phrase for this behaviour (joking aside) its
not post hoc ergo propter hoc but its along those lines.

54and56 · 04-07-2019 10:55am

MrMusician18 wrote: »

The Brexit party hasn't been tested in an election that the British care about though, so its hard to make a statement on their true level of support yet.

IMHO if there's a GE before the exiting stage of Brexit is complete the Tories will be wiped out and Labour will suffer massively also.

Brexit focused Tories (85% of Tories?) will switch to the Brexit Party as will a lot of Brexit Labour voters with a lot of Remain favouring Tories and Labour voters switching to Lib Dems unless Labour changes course and goes full throttle Remain.

Sam Russell · 04-07-2019 10:55am

MrMusician18 wrote: »

The Brexit party hasn't been tested in an election that the British care about though, so its hard to make a statement on their true level of support yet.

The BP are a single issue party that has no manifesto, no track record, and once the issue they stand for is dealt with, have no real future.

How many of the 'members'* of the BP agree about any other issue? Look what happened to UKIP when race became an issue.

* BP do not have members, merely supporters, as it is a company masquerading as a political party with no manifesto and no constitution.

murphaph · 04-07-2019 10:58am

MrMusician18 wrote: »

The Brexit party hasn't been tested in an election that the British care about though, so its hard to make a statement on their true level of support yet.

They have. They lost to Labour in the Peterborough by election, despite Peterborough being a strong leave constituency.

Leroy42 · 04-07-2019 10:58am

Peregrinus wrote: »

Brexit isn't going away, but the kind of passion that sustains a huge vote for a single-issue party may well recede. Once Brexit has formally happened, on any terms at all, I can't see a future for the Brexit party as movement attracting mass voting support.

But for a voting public that have shown that they have very little actual idea of the reality, Brexit Day will be sold as Brexit being delivered. That is why both Johnson and Hunt are pushing this idea that it must be delivered on that day.

Both of them know that it is far from being delivered. Whether WA or No Deal, the real work begins once they leave.

But the normal voter will not hear, or care,about trade deals. They will only hear of them when they are signed and have no real idea about the details.

Leroy42 · 04-07-2019 11:06am

Sam Russell wrote: »

The BP are a single issue party that has no manifesto, no track record, and once the issue they stand for is dealt with, have no real future.

How many of the 'members'* of the BP agree about any other issue? Look what happened to UKIP when race became an issue.

* BP do not have members, merely supporters, as it is a company masquerading as a political party with no manifesto and no constitution.

Totally agree. UKIP fell apart for a number of reasons, but mainly because the issue they fought on, Brexit, was acheived (or at least the ref was won).

Where the problems start for any party is trying to agree on issues and keep a single line. BP is basically Farage at the top making all the decisions, and the rest of them just need to agree to that. The issues start when these individuals start to be questioned away from the central HQ.

What are you going to do for the local hospital? What about the schools? My Aunt Edna needs a nusing home but none is available, do something. What about nuclear energy, why are utility bills continuing to rise. What will do about the LGBT rights? HS2, Northern Power House, Climate Change.

BP, and UKIP before them, offer nothing on anything other that hating the EU. It is why Johnson and Hunt are determined to leave the EU in October. Not because they think it is the best course of action for UK, but because it will deal a fatal blow to Farage. Give it three months, MEP's have all gone, no MP's, UK has left the EU. What reason in the world would anybody want to invite Farage on to talk about anything.

Sam Russell · 04-07-2019 11:10am

Leroy42 wrote: »

But for a voting public that have shown that they have very little actual idea of the reality, Brexit Day will be sold as Brexit being delivered. That is why both Johnson and Hunt are pushing this idea that it must be delivered on that day.

Both of them know that it is far from being delivered. Whether WA or No Deal, the real work begins once they leave.

But the normal voter will not hear, or care,about trade deals. They will only hear of them when they are signed and have no real idea about the details.

I caught a few moments on News Night (BBC2) where they discussed the effect on the EU and UK of a no deal Brexit. They showed, using a graphic, that the EU would suffer nearly nothing, but the effect on the UK would be huge, but ignored the 40% non EU exports. Now those non EU exports will be effected by the disappearance on the many EU trade deals that the UK uses for much of that 48%. Canada has refused to rollover their EU trade deal for the UK, but the Faeroe Islands have done a great deal with the UK.

No mention was made on non-tariff barriers such as Cert of Origin requirements, product standards, etc. that will also effect trade. They also did not mention the effect on services.

However, facts are now being shown on BBC that are not favourable to Brexit.

Progress but a bit late in the day.

Leroy42 · 04-07-2019 11:19am

Yes, but all of that will simply go to the background when Brexit is delivered (based on Tory and Farage definition of delivered).

Normal people care little about tariffs, cert of origins. You won't see prices in shops declaring that a product is 99p but with an additional costs of 10p for tariff and customs work. The item will smaller or the price will go up. Nothing will actually be mentioned.

The people who voted for BRexit do not value, or not above sovereignty, free trade within the EU and the EU trade deals that allow UK to trade with 3rd countries. They see Canada as refusing to live up to the CETA trade deal, when of course there is no living up to do. The UK need to start from scratch on that, and all other, trade deals.

Sam Russell · 04-07-2019 11:49am

Leroy42 wrote: »

Yes, but all of that will simply go to the background when Brexit is delivered (based on Tory and Farage definition of delivered).

Normal people care little about tariffs, cert of origins. You won't see prices in shops declaring that a product is 99p but with an additional costs of 10p for tariff and customs work. The item will smaller or the price will go up. Nothing will actually be mentioned.

The people who voted for BRexit do not value, or not above sovereignty, free trade within the EU and the EU trade deals that allow UK to trade with 3rd countries. They see Canada as refusing to live up to the CETA trade deal, when of course there is no living up to do. The UK need to start from scratch on that, and all other, trade deals.

Well, they will notice the roaming charges when they get to their European destination, that is after their queue at immigration. Of course, they never joined Schengen, nor the Euro, so they never got the free access and no need to change their dosh. That is what comes from being semi-detached EU members.

They will notice the inflation caused by C&E charges, the fall in the GBP, which is tipping 90p to the Euro, being at 85p in early May. Last quarter saw negative growth, with the current quarter expected to be negative as well, so recession beckons.

reslfj · 04-07-2019 12:21pm

Akrasia wrote: »

Your imagination is all well and good, but brexit isn't going anywhere for a long time.

A revoke of A50 will pretty much end UK's Brexit problems and fast bring most things back to their pre June 2016 state.

The economy will start to grow again after a short time, but from the lower point it will reach when actions already under way will take full effect (businesses moving to EU27, but still in the UK and e.g. Honda closing)

Note a revoke can't happen after Brexit day (Oct 31.)

Lars

serfboard · 04-07-2019 12:33pm

otnomart wrote: »

George Osborne 'aiming for new role as head of IMF'
https://www.theguardian.com/business/2019/jul/04/george-osborne-aiming-for-new-role-as-head-of-imf

From that article:

The Guardian wrote:

Osborne was criticised for ... the imposition of a long period of austerity on Britain, which is viewed as being one of the key reasons that fuelled the Brexit vote.

I don't know why this isn't repeated more often in analyses of the Brexit vote.

ancapailldorcha · 04-07-2019 12:36pm

serfboard wrote: »

I don't know why this isn't repeated more often in analyses of the Brexit vote.

Perhaps because UKIP and the Brexit party are quite keen on eviscerating the state and selling its organs off to foreign oligarchs and corporations.

black forest · 04-07-2019 12:46pm

I am a bit lost for words.

And this is to be continued till end of October at least? There is no logic behind it except for religious BP believers. The poor EU parlamentariens who have to endure that.

trellheim · 04-07-2019 12:51pm

5 year chart of euro/sterling . https://www.xe.com/currencycharts/?from=EUR&to=GBP&view=5Y

If you look at the chart its coming up after the low (commons voted to avoid no-deal) as risk gets priced back in

Professor Moriarty · 04-07-2019 1:03pm

black forest wrote: »

I am a bit lost for words.

And this is to be continued till end of October at least? There is no logic behind it except for religious BP believers. The poor EU parlamentariens who have to endure that.

This from a person who believes that homosexuality can be cured.

Zubeneschamali · 04-07-2019 1:19pm

Leroy42 wrote: »

Whether WA or No Deal, the real work begins once they leave.

This is why the Brexit Party will not be going away. They will sit on the ditch and shout "Treachery"! at every move Boris makes to normalize relations with the EU after Brexit.

Berserker · 04-07-2019 1:21pm

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

This from a person who believes that homosexuality can be cured.

What has that got to do with that speech? Other members, the Christian democrats for example, would share that believe. Brexit aside, does she have a valid point? The elected representatives in there barely get a chance to make a point. What can you say in 1 min 30 seconds?

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

This is why the Brexit Party will not be going away. They will sit on the ditch and shout "Treachery"! at every move Boris makes to normalize relations with the EU after Brexit.

You just don't get it, do you.

Hurrache · 04-07-2019 1:35pm

Berserker wrote: »

What has that got to do with that speech? Other members, the Christian democrats for example, would share that believe.

As a party, no, they don't.

And she doesn't have a point either. Those positions still have to be ratified by the parliament, of which she and her cronies are members. So she will have a say, despite her grandstanding.

johnnyskeleton · 04-07-2019 1:36pm

Sam Russell wrote: »

The BP are a single issue party that has no manifesto, no track record, and once the issue they stand for is dealt with, have no real future.

I mostly agree with you, but there are a few things that raise some concerns:

1. It would seem reasonably clear that Brexit isn't really about the EU. The slogans like "taking back control", "our money, our borders and our laws" etc, the anti-foreign* rhetoric, the anti-establishment rhetoric etc and the parrallells with the rise of Trump and other populist movements** are all matters that are not going to go away. They have promised that everything will be better after Brexit, but Brexit won't deal with these issues, so there will still be a large segment of British voters in this area.

2. For instance, even after Brexit, there is likely to be support for an anti-migration, anti-large corporation, anti-bank, anti-trade deals retro workers party. But these people are currently sitting cheek by jowl on the pro-Brexit side with those people who want Britain post Brexit to be Singapore on Thames. We could see two different populist movements spring up, one on the left, one on the right. Or, more worryingly, we could see both tribes unified under the next big issue.

3. Because of the strategy of promising undeliverable outcomes and then blaming others when these are not achieved, or not achieved quickly enough, it is hard to see how this generalised anger, which is currently focussed on what they perceive to be the evil EU, they will need either another scapegoat, or potentially they will keep blaming the EU long after they have left.

4. There has always been an authoritarian streak in the UK. One of the first non-royal autocrats of modern times, Oliver Cromwell, is widely hailed as some sort of democrat in England and parts of Wales. Thus, the authoritarians could rise, stating that now that Brexit is achieved, they need to obtain a true democracy (which, in fact, will be the opposite of democracy).

5. As an aside, it is not unknown for parties to retain a name long after they have achieved their goal e.g. independence parties etc. Brexit could become a byword for what they are subtly representing, together with a reference back to their big "achievement".

*Foreign states and international/multinational organisations primarily, although immigration is obviously a big issue for them.

**While populism is a somewhat vague phrase, what I mean here specifically are those parties that take a mix of traditional left wing and right wing values and put them together, e.g. like 5 Star and Liga in Italy forming a government.

BonnieSituation · 04-07-2019 1:39pm

black forest wrote: »

I am a bit lost for words.

And this is to be continued till end of October at least? There is no logic behind it except for religious BP believers. The poor EU parlamentariens who have to endure that.

"...colonies rising up against their imperial oppressors..."

May I refer Ms Widdecombe to 1798, 1803 and 1916...

That noise you heard there was the last of the goodwill exiting stage left. Not a hope they're getting an extension in October.

Berserker · 04-07-2019 1:42pm

Hurrache wrote: »

As a party, no, they don't.

And the BP does?

Hurrache wrote: »

And she doesn't have a point either. Those positions still have to be ratified by the parliament, of which she and her cronies are members. So she will have a say, despite her grandstanding.

Nothing short of blind loyalty to the EU to suggest that she doesn't. Non-BP members of the parliament have voiced their concerns about this time and time again.

Brexit discussion thread IX (Please read OP before posting)

Comments