Brexit discussion thread XI (Please read OP before posting)

Excellent panel discussion on Newsnight just now. They all agreed that Johnson's 'offer' is not genuine and that he is simply trying to win a GE by portraying Remainers, judges and the EU as the bad guys.

One of them suggested he will go straight for No Deal if he wins an election. Scary times ahead, this guy and Cummings are dangerous.

ToBeFrank123 wrote: »

prawnsambo wrote: »

Has that fact escaped you too? There's not a chance the HoC would accept this and here's another newsflash for you, the EU27 have to agree with it first.

It hasnt been put to the HoC yet so stop making things up. Lets see what happens if it is put to the HoC.

The Green flag waving, Brit bashing, is beyond tiresome at this stage.

A deal has to be struck and that means a compromise on both sides.

As for Irish people thinking a No Deal is a positive, get real. It would be a disaster for this country.

Why does it require compromise on both sides? The EU hold all the cards, the UK want something the EU has. The EU have a price for that.

Take it or leave it.

The EU will still have a house, although smaller, if a no deal happens. The UK have already burnt theirs down.

ToBeFrank123 wrote: »

It hasnt been put to the HoC yet so stop making things up. Lets see what happens if it is put to the HoC.

The Green flag waving, Brit bashing, is beyond tiresome at this stage.

A deal has to be struck and that means a compromise on both sides.

As for Irish people thinking a No Deal is a positive, get real. It would be a disaster for this country.

Yeah, the HoC might pass it. But it doesn't match what Labour want, has no appeal for the LibDems or SNP and although some Tory rebels might vote for it, they would be foolish to do so as it would strengthen Johnson which would be a very bitter pill for them to swallow. And they have him in a corner anyway. So it's not as though they absolutely need to let him out of it when there's an election to win.But we'll see. It's clearly not a serious proposal anyway, they've already let the cat out of the bag on that one, not that it would take a genius to figure out.

ToBeFrank123

Infini wrote: »

Not necessarily, we can make life hell for as long as the Tory Troll party is in charge and Britain acts the bellend in all of this. There's some under the illusion they can bully our country around, they're delusional because by harning us theyre harming the rest of the EU and there will be consequences for this.

They'll be forced to either agree to the backstop in full in the end, have a border poll, or rot in ignomonity and stupidity till they're forced by the sheer reality of their situation to accept the EUs conditions as they have no power and wont survive long if they crash out, theyll be Diplomatically, Politically and Economically bankrupt from all of this.

The very nature of our economic inter dependence means with a No Deal crash out they will drag much of our economy down with them, particularly agricultural products. We also import a lot of such products from the north. No Deal crash out means an end to All Island economy for such products.

There are no winners from a No Deal crash out. Any Irish person who would welcome it needs their head examined.

ToBeFrank123 wrote: »

Water John wrote: »

These suggestions from Johnson, and that's all they are, really don't deserve to be called, proposals, are not meant to go anywhere. They are about a blame game to up his chances in the GE.

Maybe so. Or maybe his bluff should be called. Its encumbant on everyone to try to avoid a No Deal.

Is it? A no deal is firmly under the control of the UK. If it's a no deal the UK wants why shouldn't the EU allow them their right to do it.

ToBeFrank123 wrote: »

Infini wrote: »

Not necessarily, we can make life hell for as long as the Tory Troll party is in charge and Britain acts the bellend in all of this. There's some under the illusion they can bully our country around, they're delusional because by harning us theyre harming the rest of the EU and there will be consequences for this.

They'll be forced to either agree to the backstop in full in the end, have a border poll, or rot in ignomonity and stupidity till they're forced by the sheer reality of their situation to accept the EUs conditions as they have no power and wont survive long if they crash out, theyll be Diplomatically, Politically and Economically bankrupt from all of this.

The very nature of our economic inter dependence means with a No Deal crash out they will drag much of our economy down with them, particularly agricultural products. We also import a lot of such products from the north. No Deal crash out means an end to All Island economy for such products.

There are no winners from a No Deal crash out. Any Irish person who would welcome it needs their head examined.

It's not about welcoming it, its about seeing the future based on the UKs desires and seeing that without a guarantee, or as the UK have proven already even with one, the future for trade looks bleak.

However we still have trade deals with EU, Japan, Turkey, Canada etc. Whilst the UK have nothing. Except a hopelessly divided country.

Spanish Eyes

I think they are boring us into oblivion now, and then will sneak in whilst we are not looking. lol.

Sorry, I know this is a meaningful thread, but honestly I am not seeing much of that right now from Johnson and Co. But then again, he doesn't care.

It is obvious that the rhetoric is aimed at Tory voters and feck the Brexit Party etc.

We can see it, why does no one else see the shenanigans?

ruwithme

Strazdas wrote: »

Excellent panel discussion on Newsnight just now. They all agreed that Johnson's 'offer' is not genuine and that he is simply trying to win a GE by portraying Remainers, judges and the EU as the bad guys.

One of them suggested he will go straight for No Deal if he wins an election. Scary times ahead, this guy and Cummings are dangerous.

The last part of that is why the e.u will accept his so called new proposals. it ain't great ,but won't be getting any better as if it was it would be known by now.

ToBeFrank123 wrote: »

The very nature of our economic inter dependence means with a No Deal crash out they will drag much of our economy down with them, particularly agricultural products. We also import a lot of such products from the north. No Deal crash out means an end to All Island economy for such products.

There are no winners from a No Deal crash out. Any Irish person who would welcome it needs their head examined.

Well this proposal to take NI out of the CU will kill the cross border agri-trade stone dead too. And it kills all the advances made since the GFA. Pretend not-a-border is still a border from the point of view of anyone who isn't a DUP headbanger. There are already business people in NI talking about putting their goods in cars to avoid all the checks and paperwork. May as well have a no deal for all the difference it will make.

ToBeFrank123

Leroy42 wrote: »

Is it? A no deal is firmly under the control of the UK. If it's a no deal the UK wants why should the EU allow them their right to do it.

Do you mean deny their right to do it?

If this is a bluff from Johnson it should be called.

There was no backing in the HoC for Mays deal, thanks in part to Jeremy Corbyn who opposed it. Her deal is as dead as a dodo. If a new parliament is elected its likely there will be even less support for a backstop and certainly Farage will stand on an anti backstop platform as will the Tories.

ruwithme wrote: »

The last part of that is why the e.u will accept his so called new proposals. it ain't great ,but won't be getting any better as if it was it would be known by now.

No, I suspect they might prefer No Deal to Johnson's plan. Simon Coveney said as much on the Tonight show last night....that No Deal may well be the lesser evil of the two.

joe40

Strazdas wrote: »

Excellent panel discussion on Newsnight just now. They all agreed that Johnson's 'offer' is not genuine and that he is simply trying to win a GE by portraying Remainers, judges and the EU as the bad guys.

One of them suggested he will go straight for No Deal if he wins an election. Scary times ahead, this guy and Cummings are dangerous.

Yeah the guests were great. Nice counter to the presenter's earlier enthusiasm for the proposals. She seemed quite taken aback that the lady from the times just called it "political theatre"

Water John

The contempt Johnson is showing to the interests of NI and its people needs to be highlighted over the next few days. The only ones this was run past for their view, was the DUP. the main reason to do that was to get the ERG on side.

Varta

ToBeFrank123 wrote: »

Do you mean deny their right to do it?

If this is a bluff from Johnson it should be called.

There was no backing in the HoC for Mays deal, thanks in part to Jeremy Corbyn who opposed it. Her deal is as dead as a dodo. If a new parliament is elected its likely there will be even less support for a backstop and certainly Farage will stand on an anti backstop platform as will the Tories.

The WA may have to go back to the HoC three more times, or even thirty more times. But one day, even perhaps after a no deal, the HoC and you will have to accept the backstop. The EU will wait however long it takes.

ToBeFrank123

prawnsambo wrote: »

Well this proposal to take NI out of the CU will kill the cross border agri-trade stone dead too. And it kills all the advances made since the GFA. Pretend not-a-border is still a border from the point of view of anyone who isn't a DUP headbanger. There are already business people in NI talking about putting their goods in cars to avoid all the checks and paperwork. May as well have a no deal for all the difference it will make.

Agri products exempted from CU on this island.

Strazdas wrote: »

No, I suspect they might prefer No Deal to Johnson's plan. Simon Coveney said as much on the Tonight show last night....that No Deal may well be the lesser evil of the two.

It astounds me that they can't see that. All the talk above about how hard a no deal is for us, seems to forget that the stated aim of the UK (the Tories really) is to be outside the CU and SM. So from our exporters' point of view, that's just a stay of execution for two years of the TP. When you realise that, the only possible deal that can help NI is one that keeps them in the same regime as us. It still hurts us in the long run, but at least the border stays invisible. So anything that fecks up the border as part of a deal, hurts NI and the border region for ever and a day. A no deal would at least put the pressure where it belongs and bring the UK back to the table PDQ.

A Shropshire Lad wrote: »

So..... we have gone from 'no border under any circumstances' to two borders. Thats the UK proposal ?

Not two borders, but three - the border inside the border, the actual border and the border outside the border.(*)

(*) The meanings of "inside" and "outside" depend on which side of the actual boarder you're standing on of course.

joe40 wrote: »

Yeah the guests were great. Nice counter to the presenter's earlier enthusiasm for the proposals. She seemed quite taken aback that the lady from the times just called it "political theatre"

It was a sophisticated discussion for a change. All three of them were on to Johnson and know exactly what he is up to.

ToBeFrank123 wrote: »

Agri products exempted from CU on this island.

The mechanism for this hasn't been explained. And it's completely contradicted by the stated intention of NI and the UK being in the same customs territory.

Confused by the Benn Act? Let light dawn!

https://twitter.com/GeorgePeretzQC/status/1179273473111273472

prawnsambo wrote: »

It astounds me that they can't see that. All the talk above about how hard a no deal is for us, seems to forget that the stated aim of the UK (the Tories really) is to be outside the CU and SM. So from our exporters' point of view, that's just a stay of execution for two years of the TP. When you realise that, the only possible deal that can help NI is one that keeps them in the same regime as us. It still hurts us in the long run, but at least the border stays invisible. So anything that fecks up the border as part of a deal, hurts NI and the border region for ever and a day. A no deal would at least put the pressure where it belongs and bring the UK back to the table PDQ.

It's a good thing then that Coveney and Varadkar are reading the situation correctly. Signing up to Johnson's offer could leave them tied up for years or even decades and with no way back out of it again.

Water John

They use that 3 expert panel on occasions and the conversation tends to be civilised.

ToBeFrank123 wrote: »

Leroy42 wrote: »

Is it? A no deal is firmly under the control of the UK. If it's a no deal the UK wants why should the EU allow them their right to do it.

Do you mean deny their right to do it?

If this is a bluff from Johnson it should be called.

There was no backing in the HoC for Mays deal, thanks in part to Jeremy Corbyn who opposed it. Her deal is as dead as a dodo. If a new parliament is elected its likely there will be even less support for a backstop and certainly Farage will stand on an anti backstop platform as will the Tories.

You keep misunderstanding what is happening here. The UK voted to leave, but want some of the things the EU have. So they have asked can they keep the stuff they like.

The EU said it'll cost you, this is the price. The UK said no. A normal negotiation would see the UK look elsewhere, but the EU has a monopoly on EU trade and as such they dictate the price.

It's a **** place for the UK to find itself for sure, but they put themselves there.

This was never about the EU, their position have been known from Day 1. This has been, and continues to be, all about the UK and whether it really thinks it can do better outside the EU.

Imreoir2

ToBeFrank123 wrote: »

Newsflash...any deal needs HoC approval. Do you understand that?

The HoC is welcome to continually petition the EU to allow the UK to retain membership for a few more months, and another few months, as they all wait for their fav breed of unicorn to show up. Eventually they will have to accept that any deal will be on the EU's terms and not theirs.

Water John wrote: »

They use that 3 expert panel on occasions and the conversation tends to be civilised.

It was a big relief not to have a far right lunatic among them for a change. They always poison the debate with their rhetoric and lies.

Roadtoad

Trump wanted to buy an island, Has he considered our neighbour? Three (and a bit) countries for the price of one (and a bit) islands.

jimmycrackcorm

robindch wrote: »

Confused by the Benn Act? Let light dawn!

https://twitter.com/GeorgePeretzQC/status/1179273473111273472

The EU should propose a two year extension, tell the UK to take time to figure out what they want instead of rushing into half measured approaches sure to a shortage of time.

Seasons 4 and 5 of brexit will be good but also introduce a law banning a series going beyond season 8

jimmycrackcorm wrote: »

The EU should propose a two year extension, tell the UK to take time to figure out what they want instead of rushing into half measured approaches sure to a shortage of time.

At this point, it seems clear enough that the Tories have no intention to govern the country and are simply playing politics with Brexit. For this reason, the idea of "wanting something" from Brexit doesn't really apply - Brexit, the EU, the DUP and everybody and everything else are just political tools which they try to play off against each other. And make a few quid by shorting Sterling.

Would be fun if the EU offered an unlimited time for the UK to produce an agreement which both the executive and the legislature agree with, but that would assume that the EU27 are interested in watching another ten series of Brexit and they may not be - though a ten-year extension would see many Tory and Farage voters die of old age, so the electoral advantage does decline over time.