Brexit discussion thread IX (Please read OP before posting)

Leroy42 · 19-07-2019 11:21AM

One other thing, the WA agreement is 555 pages long. Johnson is saying, and his supporters seem to agree, that they can simply ditch that and the 18 months of work that went into it and get it all done in a matter of days.

All that and with no actual idea of what to replace to bits they don't like (namely the backstop) but that somehow they will not only present this to the EU but that the EU will accept it all within a few days.

Another point, Raab's line about Win-Win. Clearly the UK need a win out of this. But the EU don't 'need' a win. A win for the EU is for the UK to stay. Anything less than that is a lose to the EU. So what incentive have the EU to make it a Win-Lose? The UK seem to think that a win for the EU is the same as a win for them when it clearly is not.

Tell me how · 19-07-2019 11:28AM

What's best for the EU at this point?

A - Is it a climb down by the UK and revocation of A50?
B - Is it that they leave with agreed deal?
C - Or leave with No Deal?

While I can see the obvious benefit of A, I think it would embolden nationalists in UK and other countries that the EU is now too powerful and they may resort to more draconian methods to get their country to leave in future.

I think B, with UK then seeking to return after a period would strengthen the EU project with minimal (although not insignificant) difficulties before they do so.

C is not good for anyone.

quokula · 19-07-2019 11:35AM

Tell me how wrote: »

What's best for the EU at this point?

A - Is it a climb down by the UK and revocation of A50?
B - Is it that they leave with agreed deal?
C - Or leave with No Deal?

While I can see the obvious benefit of A, I think it would embolden nationalists in UK and other countries that the EU is now too powerful and they may resort to more draconian methods to get their country to leave in future.

I think B, with UK then seeking to return after a period would strengthen the EU project with minimal (although not insignificant) difficulties before they do so.

C is not good for anyone.

Part of me thinks C, for all the pain it brings, is the only way the UK will learn. A and even B (which would only be the start of the real negotiation) will just strengthen and embolden the likes of Farage and turn the country into even more of a mess.

First Up · 19-07-2019 11:36AM

Leroy42 wrote:

The UK seem to think that a win for the EU is the same as a win for them when it clearly is not.

Bits of it could be - the negotiated Withdrawal Agreement was a genuine effort to meet everyone's needs. A dysfunctional and economically straitened UK is in nobody's interest.

But the EU's priority is the stability and prosperity of the union of 27 member states. If it comes to a choice between the interests of the EU and UK, there is only one winner.

Tell me how · 19-07-2019 11:40AM

quokula wrote: »

Part of me thinks C, for all the pain it brings, is the only way the UK will learn. A and even B (which would only be the start of the real negotiation) will just strengthen and embolden the likes of Farage and turn the country into even more of a mess.

My feeling with C is that pressure will be out on EU to be favourable practically on humanitarian grounds and that if things aren't very painful for the UK, they will say they are happy with their choice and will advocate for others to leave and join them.

Leroy42 · 19-07-2019 11:48AM

Tell me how wrote: »

What's best for the EU at this point?

A - Is it a climb down by the UK and revocation of A50?
B - Is it that they leave with agreed deal?
C - Or leave with No Deal?

While I can see the obvious benefit of A, I think it would embolden nationalists in UK and other countries that the EU is now too powerful and they may resort to more draconian methods to get their country to leave in future.

I think B, with UK then seeking to return after a period would strengthen the EU project with minimal (although not insignificant) difficulties before they do so.

C is not good for anyone.

But none of that is in the hands of the EU. The UK made their ref choice, they want to 'take back control' but apparently it is down to the EU to decide.

Those 3 options are what are on offer. A) is politically impossible and I agree would bring up serious long term issues on both UK and the EU.

is apparently not good enough
C) is what Johnson is happy enough to opt for.

But at no stage is this a EU decision. The EU have made an agreement based on the two positions. That people like Raab etc don't like it means that they are removing option

.

Doesn't change the rest of the dynamics

Stop moaning ffs · 19-07-2019 11:54AM

If Johnson is insisting leaving with no deal, and it happens, how long will he be around for when the consequences start kicking in? Calais will be first to manifest as a massive problem.
Surely he and the Tories get savaged at the next election? Or will we see one before Oct 31st?

seamus · 19-07-2019 12:03PM

Tell me how wrote: »

While I can see the obvious benefit of A, I think it would embolden nationalists in UK and other countries that the EU is now too powerful and they may resort to more draconian methods to get their country to leave in future.

Or...it might be a wake up call for democracy in the UK and the majority will realise how their apathy nearly allowed the racists and the wealthy sociopaths to seize control and ruin the country.

A general election at this point would be the ruination of the Tories. They don't have a majority mandate to drag the UK out of the EU. Those willing to continue to back Brexit are a distinct minority and are shrinking month-by-month.

54and56 · 19-07-2019 12:04PM

Interesting intervention by Angela Merkel - https://www.rte.ie/news/europe/2019/0719/1064029-merkel-irish-border-comment/

"The Withdrawal Agreement is the Withdrawal Agreement," Ms Merkel told a news conference.

"But the moment that a solution for the management of the border is found in (the declaration on) the future relationship - so for the European Union's future ties to Britain - which basically squares the circle - on the one hand I have no physical border but on the other hand the EU Single Market ends - that satisfies both questions, then the backstop will be overwritten, so to speak."

Ms Merkel added: "This means the task is to draft future relations that way and perhaps to draft them more specifically and better and more precisely than so far."

Is she simply stating the obvious or opening the door for Boris to find a way to let the WA pass the HoC?

joeysoap · 19-07-2019 12:09PM

If UK revoked article 50, given how bad Corbyn is, it would result in Farage looking for a GE and winning hundreds of seats, and a wipeout of the Tory party. Party before country, they’ll not revoke.

nc6000 · 19-07-2019 12:20PM

Leroy42 wrote:

I remember that speech after Salzberg, I remember it as one of the most cringeworthy speeches ever given by a politician. Basically asking the nation to get behind her as the EU were being really rude to her and she had no ability to deal with it herself.

Yes, it was a pretty cringeworthy speech alright but I don't think Tusk teasing her about cherries on Twitter or Juncker and his nebulous comment were especially helpful either.

Tell me how · 19-07-2019 12:21PM

Leroy42 wrote: »

But none of that is in the hands of the EU. The UK made their ref choice, they want to 'take back control' but apparently it is down to the EU to decide.

Those 3 options are what are on offer. A) is politically impossible and I agree would bring up serious long term issues on both UK and the EU.
is apparently not good enough
C) is what Johnson is happy enough to opt for.

But at no stage is this a EU decision. The EU have made an agreement based on the two positions. That people like Raab etc don't like it means that they are removing option .

Doesn't change the rest of the dynamics

I'm not suggesting it is for the EU to decide. I'm wondering which would be best for the societies within the EU as a whole. Including the UK and other countries.

In 12 or 24 months, all countries will still exist (hopefully), what is the best path it a safe and prosperous society for all at that time.

mrbrianj · 19-07-2019 12:22PM

From the 3 options the thing to remember is that they are really England's options (yes England, because what Scotland and NI want or need does not matter).

We have agreed the WA that fits within the limits of our single market and customs unions, Freedom of movement, treaties etc. - you want to trade with us, then that's the deal. Anything else harms us more than losing UK trade - and we cant allow that happen. It's a UK problem that they cant digest what Brexit actually means for them.

On an individual level we in Ireland will be disproportionately effected by changes to the current status compared to the rest of the EU. The benefits of EU membership outweigh the convenience of trading with the UK.

The UK is a big market which is going from being part of us to being "on our doorstep". Trade dealers in the EU must be relishing the upcoming opportunity to be able to demand great deals in this new emerging market - it's going to be ripe for the picking especially in a no deal - so its a loss to be losing a integral part of the Union but the opportunities to cherrypick from the UK may limit the effects of that loss overall.

Us here? we're in trouble!

Quin_Dub · 19-07-2019 12:35PM

54&56 wrote: »

Interesting intervention by Angela Merkel - https://www.rte.ie/news/europe/2019/0719/1064029-merkel-irish-border-comment/

"The Withdrawal Agreement is the Withdrawal Agreement," Ms Merkel told a news conference.

"But the moment that a solution for the management of the border is found in (the declaration on) the future relationship - so for the European Union's future ties to Britain - which basically squares the circle - on the one hand I have no physical border but on the other hand the EU Single Market ends - that satisfies both questions, then the backstop will be overwritten, so to speak."

Ms Merkel added: "This means the task is to draft future relations that way and perhaps to draft them more specifically and better and more precisely than so far."

Is she simply stating the obvious or opening the door for Boris to find a way to let the WA pass the HoC?

She's simply re-stating the obvious facts about the Backstop - It exists unless and until an alternative solution is agreed that satisfactorily resolves the issues around the Irish border vis a vis the Good Friday agreement and the EU customs rules.

That's what it's for and that all it will ever be for.

If the UK want to never see the backstop then come up with a solution and show the details!

All this further re-enforces how utterly moronic it was for them to trigger A50 without a plan in place.

What should have happened is that they sat down with all parties and mapped out all the potential issues and put in place mitigation for each of them and when that was complete, then move ahead on leaving.

Triggering Article 50 should have been almost the very last step in this process , not the 1st.

Water John · 19-07-2019 12:39PM

It was up to the UK to decide what it wanted internally, before triggering Art 50. The EU wasn't going to talk to them until Art 50 was triggered.

Nody · 19-07-2019 12:46PM

Tell me how wrote: »

I'm not suggesting it is for the EU to decide. I'm wondering which would be best for the societies within the EU as a whole. Including the UK and other countries.

In 12 or 24 months, all countries will still exist (hopefully), what is the best path it a safe and prosperous society for all at that time.

C for a few reasons; first of all it's the fastest way for UK to return to EU as a full member again (which is the desired outcome). It will help clear the air going all the way back to the 70s with the lies as well show to other potential Farange's in EU's various countries exactly why crashing out is a horrible idea. In short they would be the example set for any other people trying to argue to leave.

Secondly and this was mentioned above it will (hopefully) lead to a great shake up over time of the population as they realize the BS they been fed. There was a interview on the 3 pub accounts in Wales stating how one of the farmer's friends complained to him of how he had voted for Brexit but still had to ear tag his sheep as he though it would stop directly. That's an example of the level if shake up required in the British population in general which will not be an overnight thing but still very much required for them to understand the lies etc. once the politicians can't claim EU regulations on everything.

Third tied with the above once again is that it should help UK move on from the glory days of WW2 etc. and become part of the 21st century be this by death of older population or simply general education which should help force a new set of leaders into all relevant parties. This should in turn lead to a very much needed member of EU once again who can lead the charge for progress as well as work as a counterbalance to more right wing nationalistic agendas. It's a revitalization of their politics and bringing that to EU (which is needed now but even more so once they rejoin most likely).

Now why not A or B? Well A will simply change nothing in the UK in practice; the chaos will continue; the letter will be resent in a year or two by the new Brexiteer/Tory government etc. In short they need a time out to clean out their old laundry of issues and lies.

Why not B? Because to a great effect it's either going to end up in a no deal or it will end up with case A. Either scenario is simply delaying the inevitable and end up as a can kicking exercise draining energy and focus that is greatly needed elsewhere. Why? Because there is no way to get to a trade deal with UK's stated wishes and a UK wide customs union; any deal is worse than remaining but any Canada style deal is going to decimate UK by comparison to today. Hence it's damned if you do; damned if you don't scenario except it will play out over yet another 5+ years (and at least one GE which will throw everything back to square 1 again and give Brexit party a play for parliament even in a minor role).

Stop moaning ffs · 19-07-2019 01:15PM

Good read

Boris Johnson doesn't really believe in Brexit and will kick the can down the road like Theresa May did, according to columnist Rod Liddle.

https://www.lbc.co.uk/radio/presenters/iain-dale/boris-doesnt-believe-in-brexit-rod-liddle/

MrMusician18 · 19-07-2019 01:15PM

Nody wrote: »

C for a few reasons; first of all it's the fastest way for UK to return to EU as a full member again (which is the desired outcome). It will help clear the air going all the way back to the 70s with the lies as well show to other potential Farange's in EU's various countries exactly why crashing out is a horrible idea. In short they would be the example set for any other people trying to argue to leave.

Secondly and this was mentioned above it will (hopefully) lead to a great shake up over time of the population as they realize the BS they been fed. There was a interview on the 3 pub accounts in Wales stating how one of the farmer's friends complained to him of how he had voted for Brexit but still had to ear tag his sheep as he though it would stop directly. That's an example of the level if shake up required in the British population in general which will not be an overnight thing but still very much required for them to understand the lies etc. once the politicians can't claim EU regulations on everything.

Third tied with the above once again is that it should help UK move on from the glory days of WW2 etc. and become part of the 21st century be this by death of older population or simply general education which should help force a new set of leaders into all relevant parties. This should in turn lead to a very much needed member of EU once again who can lead the charge for progress as well as work as a counterbalance to more right wing nationalistic agendas. It's a revitalization of their politics and bringing that to EU (which is needed now but even more so once they rejoin most likely).

Now why not A or B? Well A will simply change nothing in the UK in practice; the chaos will continue; the letter will be resent in a year or two by the new Brexiteer/Tory government etc. In short they need a time out to clean out their old laundry of issues and lies.

Why not B? Because to a great effect it's either going to end up in a no deal or it will end up with case A. Either scenario is simply delaying the inevitable and end up as a can kicking exercise draining energy and focus that is greatly needed elsewhere. Why? Because there is no way to get to a trade deal with UK's stated wishes and a UK wide customs union; any deal is worse than remaining but any Canada style deal is going to decimate UK by comparison to today. Hence it's damned if you do; damned if you don't scenario except it will play out over yet another 5+ years (and at least one GE which will throw everything back to square 1 again and give Brexit party a play for parliament even in a minor role).

If the UK hard exits it's not coming back. The same kind of delusion posted above existed in the Irish unionist community after the treaty, that Ireland would collapse and be back in the arms of the Union within 5 years. Ireland suffered extreme economic hardship, but didn't go back.

The UK won't be coming back in the near to medium term if it actually does leave. The best that can be hoped for is that in a hard Brexit scenario the Brits agree to a SM CU relationship to end the economic disruption that keeps them outside the political structures, or some kind of associate membership, invented just for them.

So crystal ball gazing, I expect it will be C followed by a form of B some weeks/months later.

VinLieger · 19-07-2019 01:18PM

Stop moaning ffs wrote: »

Good read

Boris Johnson doesn't really believe in Brexit and will kick the can down the road like Theresa May did, according to columnist Rod Liddle.

https://www.lbc.co.uk/radio/presenters/iain-dale/boris-doesnt-believe-in-brexit-rod-liddle/

The only thing Johnson cares about is being in power at the right time for history to recognise him as "saving the UK" from some catastrophe similar to Churchill because that's how he sees himself

trellheim · 19-07-2019 01:19PM

VinLieger wrote: »

The only thing Johnson cares about is being in power

FTFY

Stop moaning ffs · 19-07-2019 01:25PM

VinLieger wrote: »

The only thing Johnson cares about is being in power at the right time for history to recognise him as "saving the UK" from some catastrophe similar to Churchill because that's how he sees himself

But he’s not stupid. Delusions of Churchill aside he still has to either get this through on the 31st oand then deal with the aftermath which will be swift and crippling, or fail to get it through and get slaughtered at the ballot box.

Easily going to be the shortest lived PM I reckon.

VinLieger · 19-07-2019 01:33PM

Stop moaning ffs wrote: »

But he’s not stupid. Delusions of Churchill aside he still has to either get this through on the 31st oand then deal with the aftermath which will be swift and crippling, or fail to get it through and get slaughtered at the ballot box.

Easily going to be the shortest lived PM I reckon.

No he is stupid, stupidly arrogant and ignorant of the realities of the situation, he also completely believes his own hype and PR and that his bluster and bluffing can wrangle him through any situation, just look at some of the videos available of him when he was Mayor of London and before the London Assembly for an example of what he is likely to be like when in power as PM

Stop moaning ffs · 19-07-2019 01:38PM

VinLieger wrote: »

No he is stupid, stupidly arrogant and ignorant of the realities of the situation, he also completely believes his own hype and PR and that his bluster and bluffing can wrangle him through any situation, just look at some of the videos available of him when he was Mayor of London and before the London Assembly for an example of what he is likely to be like when in power as PM

I think that’s all a huge act tbh. The FOT piece I posted earlier sort of agrees. But he is definitely blinded by his own wonderfulness for sure. But not as stupid as he lets on.

Zubeneschamali · 19-07-2019 01:38PM

Stop moaning ffs wrote: »

But he’s not stupid.

He's not stupid, but he is monumentally lazy and irresponsible.

He genuinely thinks he can be a Minister and even Prime Minister the way he does an after dinner speech - no prep, roll out of someone else's bed, tousle his hair and then wing it. Never fails, everyone always laughs and cheers!

Stop moaning ffs · 19-07-2019 01:41PM

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

He's not stupid, but he is monumentally lazy and irresponsible.

He genuinely thinks he can be a Minister and even Prime Minister the way he does an after dinner speech - no prep, roll out of someone else's bed, tousle his hair and then wing it. Never fails, everyone always laughs and cheers!

Two days in the Pm job will be all that’s needed to expose him to all.
The Tories fell for the clown act. The entire uk will not under any circumstances

Seth Brundle · 19-07-2019 01:42PM

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

He genuinely thinks he can be a Minister and even Prime Minister the way he does an after dinner speech - no prep, roll out of someone else's bed, tousle his hair and then wing it. Never fails, everyone always laughs and cheers!

That approach has worked for him in every other job he has been employed in.

lawred2 · 19-07-2019 01:44PM

Stop moaning ffs wrote: »

Two days in the Pm job will be all that’s needed to expose him to all.
The Tories fell for the clown act. The entire uk will not under any circumstances

I think the UK has proven itself well adept at swallowing any amount of bullsh!t. Do you not think so?

Strazdas · 19-07-2019 01:44PM

Stop moaning ffs wrote: »

I think that’s all a huge act tbh. The FOT piece I posted earlier sort of agrees. But he is definitely blinded by his own wonderfulness for sure. But not as stupid as he lets on.

I'm not so sure. I've heard several good analysts say he is nowhere near as clever as he lets on, is lazy and has poor attention to detail.

They say he hides all of this behind his massive ego and self confidence and tries to give the impression to everyone he is an intellectual colossus.

Stop moaning ffs · 19-07-2019 01:49PM

lawred2 wrote: »

I think the UK has proven itself well adept at swallowing any amount of bullsh!t. Do you not think so?

Well he’s screwed in either scenario.
Say he gets no deal through. Short lived bump of approval for delivering brexit. Then he has to accept responsibility for all that comes after.

Fails to get it through, fails to drop the backstop and make the Eu bend to his will etc etc he has to then take responsibility for that.
He’ll spin and bluster and waffle but he’s screwed in either scenario.

Water John · 19-07-2019 01:49PM

All the panellists on This Week BBC last night agreed that it would be TM's Deal dressed up. That will be by way of fleshing out the Political Declaration that is attached to the WA, as indicated by Anglea Merkel.

Brexit discussion thread IX (Please read OP before posting)

Comments