Brexit discussion thread IX (Please read OP before posting)

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

First Up wrote: »

No they wouldn't.

Why?

Because A50 very clearly says an extension needs the accept by the UK and by all EU27 member states - and before the Treaties incl A50 cease to apply (after Oct 31.).

The EU27 will follow the law and the treaties - and A50 and A49 don't leave much space for the Eu27 to operate in.

After a GE has been called, I am of the impression, that a caretaker government should not take or allow any action that permanently changes the UK's position. It should the EU27 ask for a short extension until after the GE.
Is this different in the UK?

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

....
3. We are not ready. Crashing out will hammer Ireland's economy and destroy the GFA.

A no deal will first and foremost devastate the UK.

As England is by far the largest economy the trade via English harbours and the Eurostar trains will be the main focus area for the EU.
These will be the points where UK politics breaks followed by an actual economical break down in the UK. The EU27 will clearly focus their first effort on England.

When the UK breaks down politically it will shortly after have to ask the EU27 for a deal - any deal really - the cost of which could easily be much higher for the UK than now.

Transport to/from Ireland by sea directly from/to continental harbours, I guess, will also be higher on the EU27's agenda than an early physical control along the land-border.

Tariffs and control will need to be collected at the land border Ireland<->NI, but even if it seems as many lorries each day, the volume is far lower than between EU<->England.
Note, Ireland buys more goods in the UK than it sells to the UK, and the 440 million citizens in the EU26 - 100 times the Irish population - can easily absorb a fair amount of extra Irish quality products.

Lars

PS! I do understand about the networked supply chains North-South incl e.g. Irish milk being dairy processed in NI and largely sold back to Ireland. But these are the large amounts and regular transports - relative easy to handle without much physical control - at least in the early stages of a no deal.
Tariffs will have to be paid from day 1. but for a shorter period this is after all 'just' money.

Nody wrote: »

A Shropshire Lad wrote: »

There wont be a No Deal Brexit. Parliament will block it all the way. The only way it could happen is if theres a general election and the numbers change, but unlikely before October deadline. Also its hard to imagine the Cons will want an election at all given they would be losing loads of seats to Brexit party and others.

Can people stop saying this and actually state HOW they are suppose to stop it?

Same way as in March and April.

I don't understand people saying Parliament can't stop No Deal when they already did it.

Nody wrote: »

Can people stop saying this and actually state HOW they are suppose to stop it? Yes; they voted against no brexit but they also failed to agree for ANY direction to take instead. Hence the parliament can sit there and vote against no brexit until they go blue in their face but short of actually stepping up and voting FOR what should be instead they will stop nothing. Hence voting against no brexit means nothing if they don't vote what the government has to do instead; and they have never had a majority for any solution and guess what happens then? Crash out 31st October no matter how much they vote against it.

What will shift the blockage is a GE. May spent her entire premiership keeping the Tory party intact and in power. Which brings me to your point about Johnson gaining from No Deal. Even if his government were to survive through to November and he presided over a No Deal, he has a wafer thin majority. I can only imagine what Ulster industry and farmers would be saying to the DUP. The idea that Johnson can lower taxes while improving the NHS doesn't compute. Especially as tax revenues will tank after crashing out. I'm afraid I can't see Johnson being re-elected after crashing out and a subsequent GE.

But just to reiterate, September will see the large majority of MPs across the Commons putting enormous pressure on Johnson to avoid No Deal.

So No Deal happened in March and in April too?

Nody wrote: »

Can people stop saying this and actually state HOW they are suppose to stop it? Yes; they voted against no brexit but they also failed to agree for ANY direction to take instead. Hence the parliament can sit there and vote against no brexit until they go blue in their face but short of actually stepping up and voting FOR what should be instead they will stop nothing. Hence voting against no brexit means nothing if they don't vote what the government has to do instead; and they have never had a majority for any solution and guess what happens then? Crash out 31st October no matter how much they vote against it.

To add; the only solution I've heard/read/seen to date is on the previous page with the no confidence vote which require both (currently) main parties to go against their respective whips and leaders to join up and this has to happen in a very short time interval.

Why would Labour whip against a vote of no confidence in the the Tories?

Nody wrote: »

Not really disagreeing with anything you state except as I noted earlier I think he'll take crash out to avoid guaranteed kick out by his own party and gamble he can keep bluffing after a crash out. I don't think he can and that he's not up to the task but the common theme for most UK politicians in senior positions is an never ending belief that they are the savior UK (and their party) needs no matter what facts are put forward.

I agree. I think he is that ambitious that he will try to take whatever road he thinks will keep him in power - including No Deal. He's a populist through and through.

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

Corbyn was never pro No Deal though. Anyway Corbyn is powerless these days. The membership is staunchly remain and his shadow cabinet is either ignoring him or defying him. His best chance now is to do what he's told.

If things were as bad as that for him, he'd be gone already. He still is a favourite with many of the grass roots who like his socialist ideals without shining too much of a light on them in terms of realism.
Many of those who are remain haven't yet realised that he is not that way inclined and that he is helping to push the country to the brink.
I do think the clock is ticking for him given their polling position but I've thought he should be gone with at least 12 months already and yet he is still there.

Tell me how wrote: »

If things were as bad as that for him, he'd be gone already. He still is a favourite with many of the grass roots who like his socialist ideals without shining too much of a light on them in terms of realism.
Many of those who are remain haven't yet realised that he is not that way inclined and that he is helping to push the country to the brink.
I do think the clock is ticking for him given their polling position but I've thought he should be gone with at least 12 months already and yet he is still there.

It's a mirror image of the ERG running the Tory party. Momentum have a stranglehold on Labour. But Corbyn can no longer r defy his shadow cabinet's and Momentum's demands for a second referendum.

Nody wrote: »

And once again I'm not disagreeing with your facts or general conclusion but with the simple matter we're dealing with a person who cares about ideology only. Look at the beating they were told they would take in the EU election due to not taking a clear remain position; polls showing how they would more than double if they said outright they would back a second referendum. Yet they did nothing of the sort. Look at the general polls all stating the same thing; yet Corbyn refuses to actually speak up clearly for remain and rather waddle it all up in ambiguity to allow him to pretend he agrees with everyone when in reality he wants out. Any rational person should have gone remain and rocked those polls months ago yet he refused to do so even when challenged by his own MPs. His ministers would come up state Labour is pro referendum only to have him come out and deny that. Most party leaders would align with you; Corbyn however is a reverse May were hell and high water he'll keep forcing his vision on everyone until he gets his way no matter the cost in terms of MPs or voters backing him.

He's presiding over the death of Labour. The dire personal and party polling aside, the antisemitism isn't going away. That's his fault - he's the boss. Panorama will be doing a programme on how Labour threatened whistleblowers. That's his fault. On Brexit, he's completely out of tune with the party membership and the vast majority of his MPs. That's his fault. I think that the worm is turning though. Even his close friends such as Abbot and McDonnell are now publicly disagreeing with him. And Momentum and the general membership want a second referendum. He's completely isolated now. All this with a possible No Deal and/or a possible GE by November. It's crunch time for him. I don't think Labour has any other choice - he either gets in line or there will be a heave.

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

He's presiding over the death of Labour. The dire personal and party polling aside, the antisemitism isn't going away. That's his fault - he's the boss. Panorama will be doing a programme on how Labour threatened whistleblowers. That's his fault. On Brexit, he's completely out of tune with the party membership and the vast majority of his MPs. That's his fault. I think that the worm is turning though. Even his close friends such as Abbot and McDonnell are now publicly disagreeing with him. And Momentum and the general membership want a second referendum. He's completely isolated now. All this with a possible No Deal and/or a possible GE by November. It's crunch time for him. I don't think Labour has any other choice - he either gets in line or there will be a heave.

Corbyn is gone the day Barry Gardiner refuses to support him publically.

So far. Gardiner has made some criticism of Party decisions like allowing Hatton back into Labour, but he has allowed himself to be put forward front and centre to defend Corbyn's position on Brexit.

He's been one of his key backers in public in the past year but he is listed as 'neutral' on that leaked list of Labour mps attitudes to Corbyn

Corbyn will always have his core support, and those who are opposed to him, but when he can not longer rely on the influential middle ground then the end is nigh.

CelticRambler wrote: »

It's mildly amusing to see, on this thread full of "Irish" opinions, the future of England/GB/UK still framed in terms of Tory vs. Labour. Is there no-one who considers (never mind believes) that the Lib Dems might run a campaign with the slogan "Do the Unthinkable" and win enough seats to form a stable coalition with e.g. the SNP and Plaid Cymru ?

I do.

And if that were to happen, chances are the second thing they'd do (the first being to revoke Art.50) would be to scrap FPTP and change the British political landscape forever more.

Your second paragraph is why the first won't happen.

I'm not saying Labour/Conservatives will dominate for ever more but we are bit away from a Lib Dem, Snp, Plaid Cymru just yet.
No spotlight has been shine one them or their policies yet because they're not seen as a realistic threat yet.

Print media, in particular, will eviscerate a lot of their candidates should they be judged to be approaching the top table.

Unfortunately, if a disruptive force us to emerge at next GE, it'll likely be the Brexit Party.

lawred2 wrote: »

I'm not sure that the UK can rely of extensions being granted in perpetuity!

Brexit will cost the EU a lot of money if it ever happens. Extensions are cheap and keep the door open to the whole thing being called off.


An extension is a no-brainer from the EU side.