Brexit discussion thread IX (Please read OP before posting)

Robert McGrath wrote: »

J Mysterio wrote: »

Getting more expensive I would have thought

Only if the amount is fixed in € rather than GBP

Nate--IRL-- wrote: »

There is no number agreed - just a method of calculation

The amount is not fixed at all. It is as Nate writes only the method of calculation that has been agreed.

Each the UK has to actually pay the amount in £ will be calculated. this will happen many times over the next 40+ years.

Lars

LordBasil wrote: »

It looks like Leo Varadkar is being lined up as the Brexit 'Bogeyman' by the Tories and Brexiteer UK Press because he's not backing down over the backstop. A handy fall guy to blame for No Deal....

From a hard Brexiteers perspective he's the perfect poster boy to blame as from their perspective he's:-

- Irish (obviously)
- An immigrant
- Gay
- A republican

He's the polar opposite of Little Englander's and those who support the DUP.

He's also calm and consistent, has a great team around him particularly Coveney, McEntee and Richmond and FF & Labour are (with the exception of Dooley) playing a strong supporting role which is to their credit.

All Varadkar has to do is remain calm, stick to the rhetoric that Brexit is a UK initiative, the backstop is essential given the red lines defined by the UK and it is entirely within the UK's own gift to avoid a No Deal Brexit if it wants to i.e. it can ratify the WA, withdraw A50, extend for a referendum or a GE.

Exiting on Oct 31st on a No Deal is entirely withing the UK's control and no-one else. If they choose to do so c'est la vie.

brickster69 wrote: »

You see, this is my point. It was dead 6 months ago and people still think it is alive. even the Eu won't accept it is dead.

It is Dead, finished, Kaput, Finito, Morte ! Accept it and move on.

No-deal is dead. It was dead 6 months ago when parliament rejected. It has been rejected multiple times. So what options are we left with? The deal on the table is dead, leaving without a deal is dead so revoke is the only viable option open to the UK right now.

I wonder what Brexiters will choose, revoke or the deal?

fash wrote: »

The reason the WA was rejected is because 35% is the parliament want to remain and another 35% want a labour brexit. When they realise neither of those is likely, they'll be happy with the WA.

The problem Labour has is they cannot allow a Tory Brexit to happen so while Corbyn may be looking for Brexit, a Tory Brexit will not be what he favours. So he has to stand against whatever deal they bring to the table or their voters, who is 65% remain in the referendum, will abandon him even more than they have.

So you have 35% remain and another 15% Lexiters who want to leave on Labour terms only. These numbers are plucked from nothing more than my own backside.

Just a couple of thoughts, I would love Johnson to be probed on the flexibility they as a government has shown that should show the EU there is a deal to be made. The only moves he has made is to draw his own red lines the same as May with leaving the customs union and single market but having no border. The only problem as most of us are aware is that this ground has been covered already and time is running out.

There were posts earlier in the thread today about what mandate the politicians have regarding the referendum. I don't know how you can argue for either a hard Brexit or soft based on the question asked, what I do know is that 54% of the vote in the 2017 General election went to parties that rules out no-deal. So what we do know there is most definitely not a mandate for no-deal, no matter how many times people try to say it.

[Deleted User] wrote: »

It's worth re-stating every so often just what an excellent deal was offered to the UK. It would have minimised the effects of leaving the EU while giving some pretty big advantages to the UK over any other non-member. The backstop was proposed by the EU to give NI special status and the UK accepted. It could have been a boon to one of the least performing economies in western Europe. The British asked to extend the backstop and the EU acquiesced. I was annoyed at the time how much the EU gave away and any suggestion of a "better deal" for the UK side be dismissed out of hand.

That's because it was never about the deal. The deal wouldn't allow asset stripping or currency devaluation.


The absolute hilarity of the people who to this day defend snake oil salesmen in brexit party ukip and Tories who are getting paid by private companies whilst also operating in their official political government capacities.


You couldn't write this stuff as it wouldn't make a believable book

Enzokk wrote: »

No-deal is dead. It was dead 6 months ago when parliament rejected. It has been rejected multiple times. So what options are we left with? The deal on the table is dead, leaving without a deal is dead so revoke is the only viable option open to the UK right now.

I wonder what Brexiters will choose, revoke or the deal?

Only problem with that is that the law of land states the UK leave the EU with or without a deal 31/10/2019

As it stands at the moment the WA is dead, and it is more or less impossible for any party to revoke because in the new session of parliament only the Government will have the power to make new laws.

Only option is to bring the Government down have an election and Corbyn or whoever agrees to stay or whatever.

brickster69 wrote: »

Only problem with that is that the law of land states the UK leave the EU with or without a deal 31/10/2019

As it stands at the moment the WA is dead, and it is more or less impossible for any party to revoke because in the new session of parliament only the Government will have the power to make new laws.

Only option is to bring the Government down have an election and Corbyn or whoever agrees to stay or whatever.

I think Johnson's plan for an election is to try and win back the Brexit Party voters that have left the Conservatives. That is why he is talking about no-deal and the WA being dead. I think it is more likely that if there is an election and he is able to achieve a majority he will pivot to accept the WA to get Brexit done if they have not crashed out already.

It is that or he has lost his mind and will go for no-deal. Ivan Rogers predicted this could happen where the UK falls out of the EU without a deal due to politicians mishandling the situation and Johnson is playing with fire.

We are back at the cherry picking for the UK, you can zoom in on the picture and it is relatively easy to read the article on the right. It seems the plan is for the new deal to take the UK out of the EU with a 2 year transition period where they are still in the CU and SM. During this 2 year period they will be able to negotiate a new FTA and there will not be the backstop to secure no border between us and NI.

I wish those camera crews are still following the EU teams and the Brexit negotiations, it will be fascinating to see what they really think of Johnson and his pronouncements and the new negotiators he will send to the EU. Oh, to be a fly on the wall for these meetings.

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EAwSHEeXUAAiwm2?format=jpg&name=large

listermint wrote: »

If he is it's Johnson trying to soften his appearance. He's been getting absolute abuse in Scotland and Wales the last two days.

Johnson is in Belfast tomorrow, so it wouldn't be beyond the bounds of possibility that himself and Varadkar could meet tomorrow.

54&56 wrote: »

I really hope Leo doesn't travel north to meet Johnson but that Johnson travels south to meet Leo.

Supplicants need to be seen as supplicants.

Leo will soon be responsible for the part of Ireland Boris is visiting.

listermint wrote: »

If he is it's Johnson trying to soften his appearance. He's been getting absolute abuse in Scotland and Wales the last two days.

Quite the climbdown from refusing to talk to anyone EU until the backstop was removed.

54&56 wrote: »

I really hope Leo doesn't travel north to meet Johnson but that Johnson travels south to meet Leo.

Supplicants need to be seen as supplicants.

Agree, I'd have hoped Leo would have more sense, it wasn't long ago they were expecting our government to report on how the border would work.

Britain/Tories need to stop being treated as children.

Let them travel to us if they want to discuss solutions to their problem.

Mr.Nice Guy wrote: »

I wonder what Johnson and the DUP were discussing. Perhaps he urged them to go hard on Varadkar when the media descend on Belfast - not that the DUP need much encouraging on that front. We'll find out shortly.

Expecting plenty of "it's up to Dublin to stop playing hardball" etc.

I doubt Johnson and Co think much of the DUP, or even allow in their house, they're useful idiots

Mr.Nice Guy wrote: »

Expecting plenty of "it's up to Dublin to stop playing hardball" etc.

The backstop will happen on the island of Ireland - but the freeze on the WA is not an Irish decision nor will it ever be.

It's an all EU27 decision taken by all 27 PMs in Brussels - and it will continue that way.

Very many EU27 countries have their own vivid memories and some even present day experiences with non open borders.

The SM is the shinning star of the EU and will be fiercely protected.

Lars

It's already started on sky news, putting the backstop back on Ireland saying the economic impact on Ireland will be worse than England.