Brexit discussion thread VIII (Please read OP before posting)

Peregrinus · 02-04-2019 11:30am

lawred2 wrote: »

Say what now?

I obviously missed where the options on this confirmatory referendum were already defined...

If those are the options then it's no wonder Tories are so concerned..

They're not already defined. I'm hypothesising that the outcome of the indicative vote process could be aproval for:

- May's WA plus a revised and softer Pol Dec, conditional on

- approval of this package in a binary referendum in which the other option would be Remain.

As already pointed out, there are risks for both Labour and the SNP in agreeing to this, and both would have to be willing to compromise. The SNP might end up with Brexit, which they don't want, on terms which fail to preserve FoM, which they also don't want. The Labour party might end up with no Brexit, whcih they don't want.

But they're both opposition parties, and they have an opportunity to take control here, humiliating and fracturing the Tories and getting at least a sporting chance of the Brexit outcome they want, and the certainty of avoiding no-deal which they both very much don't want, so that's gotta be attractive.

Hurrache · 02-04-2019 11:32am

Tell me how wrote: »

There is an interesting programme on a key part of all this on BBC 4 tomorrow night at 21:00

Link

https://twitter.com/earlofantrim17/status/1112847617946476545

It was on last week too, it's pretty decent, albeit doesn't go into a massive amount of detail and fine print, but that's not what the program is about.

FrancieBrady · 02-04-2019 11:35am

looksee wrote: »

Sinn Fein person (I was driving and can't recall who it was) being interviewed on RTE yesterday said that having a hard border would be 'dangerous'. It sounded more like a threat than an opinion, but it wasn't clear who was being threatened.

SF made a threat?

Where is the threat in repeating what the PSNI say and many other commentators and stakeholders say as well - are they 'threatening' something too?

LeinsterDub · 02-04-2019 11:35am

looksee wrote: »

Sinn Fein person (I was driving and can't recall who it was) being interviewed on RTE yesterday said that having a hard border would be 'dangerous'. It sounded more like a threat than an opinion, but it wasn't clear who was being threatened.

This says more about you than the SF person. Numerous people for across the entire political spectrum have indicated that a hard border could become dangerous to those who'd have to enforce it.

Shelga · 02-04-2019 11:39am

Peregrinus wrote: »

If parliament can dictate one of the options on the ballot, it can dictate the other. You are correct that Parliament's decision would have to be very prescriptive, but I think at this stage Parliament understands that very well.

There's a weakness with the indicative vote process, which is that it's not binding. No matter what Parliament approves in an indicative vote, May can simply decline to go to the EU and ask for a long extension to implement it. And, if May does that, as far as I can see it's game over.

So everything crucially depends on May not regarding no-deal as an acceptable outcome.

If she regards it as an acceptable outcome, then it's game over even now; regardless of the outcome of the indicative vote process, May will ignore it and no-deal will ensue.

If she doesn't, then if May has to choose between:

- (a) go to the EU and ask for an extension to implement a plan approved by Parliament, which is May's WA plus a political declaration oriented towards a customs union or single market or both, coupled with a confirmatory referendum, or

- (b) no-deal

she'll choose (a).

You think May will choose No Deal over a long extension to facilitate something else?

That’s terrifying. Incredible times we are living through.

woohoo!!! · 02-04-2019 11:41am

gormdubhgorm wrote: »

BobbyBobberson wrote: »

Exactly. Do we honestly think that MP's would have voted the same if Sinn Fein had been there?

There is no way that the Conservative and Unionist Party propped up by the Democratic Unionist Party would have allowed Sinn Fein to dictate the UK's exit from the EU.

If Sinn Fein REALLY wanted to make a difference they would go through the motions of taking the oath of allegiance while crossing thier fingers.
But no they want to do nothing even in Stormont and pretend to really want an Irish language act.
I think Sinn Fein really missed a trick as regards Brexit they could have entered the commons. Then they could be as obstructionist as they like.

Do you have any idea about how northern nationalists feel about Westminster? They're not in the least bit surprised by how all this is turning out. They are done with Westminster and will not be dictated to by the likes of the DUP over Stormont. They're looking to Dublin and Brussels to advance their interests.

But the most salient point is, SF entering HoC will be a propaganda coup to DUP, ERG and the red tops, that Corbyn et al are siding with IRA murderers this ending any notion of a softer Brexit.

The blame for the mess lies entirely with the tories and the DUP.

ancapailldorcha · 02-04-2019 11:54am

Posts deleted. Serious discussion only please.

First Up · 02-04-2019 12:15pm

mikep wrote:

Thinking about the hard border, I heard someone from Dublin port on the radio saying they had infrastructure in place for inspections etc including space for extra storage if required. One can assume that the same is happening in Cork and Rosslare.

The Irish ports serving EU ports are well set up. Nothing will get on a ferry to the EU unless it is EU country of origin compliant. Anything that isn't will be processed as an Import into the EU before it is allowed on.

Northern Irish freight can continue to use Dublin, Rosslare and Cork ports to access the continent but it will be processed seperately. A lorry park is being opened near Dublin airport as part of this.

There may be some slippage for local traffic around the Irish border but the integrity of the Single Market will be hermetically sealed.

Professor Moriarty · 02-04-2019 12:24pm

Oliver Letwin now "90% certain" there will be a No Deal exit. Has given up on any more indicative votes. He's either scaremongering or accepting what he sees as the inevitable.

Russman · 02-04-2019 12:27pm

I really don't think we'll see a return to much violence tbh.
I honestly think that since probably 9/11 that terrorism for political aims is a bit of a busted flush (ISIS aside, that's a different issue altogether). Its just soooo 1980s. The tolerance just isn't there in the broader population that they need to hide in.
Plus with modern communication and surveillance, guys would be picked up and whisked off before the even knew what was happening and people are less concerned nowadays if terrorists are treated "harshly" than they might have been in the past.
You'll get the odd headbanger I'm sure, but I just don't see a wholesale return to the bad old days.

If its handled correctly and cleverly, it'll only need to be a border for the length of time it takes the UK to come to their senses, and I'm sure with the right bureaucracy and planning/tendering requirements etc we could easily string it out for a few months before any infrastructure would go up.

gormdubhgorm · 02-04-2019 12:43pm

woohoo!!! wrote: »

Do you have any idea about how northern nationalists feel about Westminster? They're not in the least bit surprised by how all this is turning out. They are done with Westminster and will not be dictated to by the likes of the DUP over Stormont. They're looking to Dublin and Brussels to advance their interests.

But the most salient point is, SF entering HoC will be a propaganda coup to DUP, ERG and the red tops, that Corbyn et al are siding with IRA murderers this ending any notion of a softer Brexit.

The blame for the mess lies entirely with the tories and the DUP.

Extraordinary times call for extraordinary measures.
It would only be a 'propaganda coup' for a while real business would be able to begin then.
Sinn Fein should at least consider going to the commons. They might lose some core vote but gain new voters.
That would be real leadership. Sinn Fein are as much to blame for Brexit as the Conservatives May/Cameron/Rees-Mogg et al - Labour - Corbyn and his wishy washy half hearted remain campaign. The DUP -Arelene etc.

But Sinn Fein much perfer being the hurlers in the ditch in the dail/stormont/HOC. They are only opoosition in one and are not in the other two at the moment.
Sinn Fein are as much to blame as the others for Brexit as they hide behind a 'mandate' and do nothing.

murphaph · 02-04-2019 12:47pm

gormdubhgorm wrote: »

Extraordinary times call for extraordinary measures.
It would only be a 'propaganda coup' for a while real business would be able to begin then.
Sinn Fein should at least consider going to the commons. They might lose some core vote but gain new voters.
That would be real leadership. Sinn Fein are as much to blame for Brexit as the Conservatives May/Cameron/Rees-Mogg et al - Labour - Corbyn and his wishy washy half hearted remain campaign. The DUP -Arelene etc.

But Sinn Fein much perfer being the hurlers in the ditch in the dail/stormont/HOC. They are only opoosition in one and are not in the other two at the moment.
Sinn Fein are as much to blame as the others for Brexit as they hide behind a 'mandate' and do nothing.

I would probably never be able to vote for SF given their links to the IRA in the not so recent past but they are not responsible for Brexit in the slightest. If they went to the HoC people would vote against whatever way they vote. It wouldn't help at all as it's not a zero sum game.

Thargor · 02-04-2019 12:49pm

gormdubhgorm wrote: »

Sinn Fein are as much to blame for Brexit as the Conservatives May/Cameron/Rees-Mogg et al - Labour - Corbyn and his wishy washy half hearted remain campaign

Wow excellent analysis :rolleyes:

BobbyBobberson · 02-04-2019 12:50pm

Sinn Fein are not as responsible for Brexit as the Tories.

prawnsambo · 02-04-2019 12:52pm

First Up wrote: »

The Irish ports serving EU ports are well set up. Nothing will get on a ferry to the EU unless it is EU country of origin compliant. Anything that isn't will be processed as an Import into the EU before it is allowed on.

Northern Irish freight can continue to use Dublin, Rosslare and Cork ports to access the continent but it will be processed seperately. A lorry park is being opened near Dublin airport as part of this.

There may be some slippage for local traffic around the Irish border but the integrity of the Single Market will be hermetically sealed.

I would think that NI freight for the UK mainland could continue as before through Dublin port as well. Would just need to put a customs seal on it at point of despatch and carry on as TIR freight. The only issue for the hauliers would be the ECMT permits. I imagine many of them are (or have been) setting up south of the border to circumvent that issue.

02-04-2019 12:52pm

I'd honestly be reconsidering my SF vote up north. I don't know the dynamics all that well but I'd want my voice heard.

I don't want SF to go to the Commons. Just talking future.

Shelga · 02-04-2019 1:03pm

If they leave with no deal, are there any circumstances in which Leavers would recognise that the ensuing economic catastrophe is a direct result of crashing out? Or will they somehow find other ways to explain everything away? This is, after all, mass cognitive dissonance on a scale I've never seen before.

Would it just be like "diesel diesel diesel" for every supermarket shortage, for every lorry queue?

MrFresh · 02-04-2019 1:05pm

Shelga wrote: »

If they leave with no deal, are there any circumstances in which Leavers would recognise that the ensuing economic catastrophe is a direct result of crashing out? Or will they somehow find other ways to explain everything away? This is, after all, mass cognitive dissonance on a scale I've never seen before.

Would it just be like "diesel diesel diesel" for every supermarket shortage, for every lorry queue?

They're already blaming the EU for punishing them in the negotiations for leaving.

BobbyBobberson · 02-04-2019 1:07pm

https://twitter.com/SebastianEPayne/status/1113037778407829505

My god.

funkey_monkey · 02-04-2019 1:07pm

https://twitter.com/instituteforgov/status/1112836458329640960

Why did SNP abstain on the CU option last night?

Interestingly, there seems to be a core number of around 40 Tories who abstained on all votes. Do we know if that number was made up of a consistent core of MPs or if it was various names dropping in and out?

briany · 02-04-2019 1:09pm

Shelga wrote: »

If they leave with no deal, are there any circumstances in which Leavers would recognise that the ensuing economic catastrophe is a direct result of crashing out? Or will they somehow find other ways to explain everything away? This is, after all, mass cognitive dissonance on a scale I've never seen before.

Would it just be like "diesel diesel diesel" for every supermarket shortage, for every lorry queue?

I don't think Comical Ali would have anything on Nigel Farage, Mark Francois or JRM in terms of bare-faced denial in the event wherever a no-deal Brexit is a disaster, and their followers will likely go along with that.

To be fairly also, if a no-deal Brexit somehow tuebed into a rousing success, I think the levels of denial on the other side would be similar.

robinph · 02-04-2019 1:13pm

funkey_monkey wrote: »

https://twitter.com/instituteforgov/status/1112836458329640960

Why did SNP abstain on the CU option last night?

Interestingly, there seems to be a core number of around 40 Tories who abstained on all votes. Do we know if that number was made up of a consistent core of MPs or if it was various names dropping in and out?

That would be the cabinet who were told not to participate.

funkey_monkey · 02-04-2019 1:17pm

robinph wrote: »

That would be the cabinet who were told not to participate.

Yes - forgot about that.

https://www.gov.uk/government/ministers

That would total 23 ministers, plus 6 hangers-on = 29. So, about 10 regular Tory MPs abstained.

02-04-2019 1:17pm

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

Oliver Letwin now "90% certain" there will be a No Deal exit. Has given up on any more indicative votes. He's either scaremongering or accepting what he sees as the inevitable.

Yep, Beth Rigby reporting this. Mood is 'grim' apparently.

https://twitter.com/BethRigby/status/1113033361373782021

marno21 · 02-04-2019 1:17pm

Shelga wrote: »

If they leave with no deal, are there any circumstances in which Leavers would recognise that the ensuing economic catastrophe is a direct result of crashing out? Or will they somehow find other ways to explain everything away? This is, after all, mass cognitive dissonance on a scale I've never seen before.

Would it just be like "diesel diesel diesel" for every supermarket shortage, for every lorry queue?

They will blame the EU and a whole host of others and the violent rhetoric and division will get worse. Given the volume of people who support a no deal Brexit it seems these people will believe anything

It really has been an exercise in mass disinformation and brainwashing. The damage is already done at this point. It's sad that we are so caught up in it. If it was on the other side of the world we'd be laughing

PropJoe10 · 02-04-2019 1:18pm

BobbyBobberson wrote: »

https://twitter.com/SebastianEPayne/status/1113037778407829505

My god.

Of course she would. She sees it as her binding moral duty to deliver Brexit, no matter what the cost. There is no good solution to any of this shambles.

joe40 · 02-04-2019 1:24pm

gormdubhgorm wrote: »

Extraordinary times call for extraordinary measures.
It would only be a 'propaganda coup' for a while real business would be able to begin then.
Sinn Fein should at least consider going to the commons. They might lose some core vote but gain new voters.
That would be real leadership. Sinn Fein are as much to blame for Brexit as the Conservatives May/Cameron/Rees-Mogg et al - Labour - Corbyn and his wishy washy half hearted remain campaign. The DUP -Arelene etc.

But Sinn Fein much perfer being the hurlers in the ditch in the dail/stormont/HOC. They are only opoosition in one and are not in the other two at the moment.
Sinn Fein are as much to blame as the others for Brexit as they hide behind a 'mandate' and do nothing.

The only way that SinnFein would be able to influence the HoC to support any deal would be for them to publicly and vociferously back a "no deal" so that they could then say they will pursue a border poll.
(obviously half joking here)
But the idea that Sinn Fein could go to Westminster and support a deal...
Could you imagine what the DUP and ERG could do with that. Everyone else who supports the same deal would not only be labelled as traitors (already happened to Domininc Grieve) but also IRA sympatheisers.

looksee · 02-04-2019 1:24pm

LeinsterDub wrote: »

This says more about you than the SF person. Numerous people for across the entire political spectrum have indicated that a hard border could become dangerous to those who'd have to enforce it.

And why would that be?

Leroy42 · 02-04-2019 1:27pm

PropJoe10 wrote: »

Of course she would. She sees it as her binding moral duty to deliver Brexit, no matter what the cost. There is no good solution to any of this shambles.

TBF, it is on the only legacy she can possibly achieve at this stage. Her time as PM will be remembered as totally ineffective, save for Brexit.

So does she leave with the Brexit question put back onto the converoy belt of take the risk that a No Deal won't be as bad as expected. She will be saved from any negative effects regardless, so it is probably worth the risk and she will at least have achieved something.

joe40 · 02-04-2019 1:27pm

looksee wrote: »

And why would that be?

Dissident republicans. Was that a serious question?

FrancieBrady · 02-04-2019 1:27pm

looksee wrote: »

And why would that be?

Here is the PSNI 'threatening' :rolleyes:

https://www.rte.ie/news/brexit/2017/1207/925737-psni-border/

Senior PSNI officers have warned British MPs that a hard post-Brexit border would be an obvious area of attack for dissident republican terrorists.

Giving evidence to the House of Commons Brexit Committee in Co Armagh, the PSNI's Deputy Chief Constable Drew Harris said any infrastructures along the border would give terror groups "a further rallying call to drive their recruitment."

"They have a focus on this. They see it as an opportunity.

02-04-2019 1:38pm

How do ye reckon my bet that it won't happen is doing?

While chaotic, and that last day option was beaten by a good margin yesterday, it still feels plausible.

MrFresh · 02-04-2019 1:45pm

funkey_monkey wrote: »

https://twitter.com/instituteforgov/status/1112836458329640960

Why did SNP abstain on the CU option last night?

They're focusing on no Brexit options like the lib Dems aren't they?

ShooterSF · 02-04-2019 1:45pm

Peregrinus wrote: »

No, it doesn't. The only possible outcomes are the two options in the referendum, which would be (a) Remain, or (b) softer brexit than May's.

Can you point me to where the confirmatory vote put forward mentions any details of what question would be asked. The people putting it forward seem very quiet about it. One Tory MP asked yesterday given that people had already voted leave would the confirmatory vote be between an agreed deal and no deal. The MP putting forward the motion refused to agree or disagree to that if memory serves.

Edit - I see from further posts that you are just making your best guess. Fair enough but I don't think it's a certainty.

MPFGLB · 02-04-2019 1:45pm

funkey_monkey wrote: »

https://twitter.com/instituteforgov/status/1112836458329640960

Why did SNP abstain on the CU option last night?

Interestingly, there seems to be a core number of around 40 Tories who abstained on all votes. Do we know if that number was made up of a consistent core of MPs or if it was various names dropping in and out?

See the DUP voted 'No' to all options ...no change there ..they even voted 'No' to May's deal (3 times) and they said the other day (well one of them did ) that they would prefer to stay in EU than support Mays deal.....They are so constructive :rolleyes: especially after hanging out with the ERG for 2 years.
Ulster is still saying 'No' to everything as per

Water John · 02-04-2019 1:46pm

I think Letwin is holding off until next Monday and giving Cooper a run tomorrow. If she is successful they will push a Bill through, instructing the PM.

MrMusician18 · 02-04-2019 1:48pm

Deleted User wrote: »

I'd honestly be reconsidering my SF vote up north. I don't know the dynamics all that well but I'd want my voice heard.

I don't want SF to go to the Commons. Just talking future.

It's the same party in the republic, are you considering your SF vote here?

ShooterSF · 02-04-2019 1:52pm

A valid point made is even if say CU gets a small majority and May decides to take it up can we trust them to continue to support it as it gets fleshed out and negotiated. Whats to say 6 months into an extension that some MPs don't dislike the deal that is being negotiated and we're back to square one. If an abstract idea which is going to be subject to compromise with the EU has little support before hand it seems plausible that we get an agreement and again the HOC shoots it down.

02-04-2019 1:52pm

MrMusician18 wrote: »

It's the same party in the republic, are you considering your SF vote here?

I'd never vote for SF. I was talking about their voters up North who could be worried about Brexit.

blanch152 · 02-04-2019 1:57pm

MPFGLB wrote: »

See the DUP voted 'No' to all options ...no change there ..they even voted 'No' to May's deal (3 times) and they said the other day (well one of them did ) that they would prefer to stay in EU than support Mays deal.....They are so constructive :rolleyes: especially after hanging out with the ERG for 2 years.
Ulster is still saying 'No' to everything as per

Parties from the North just don't get it, they are in a world of their own.

Anteayer · 02-04-2019 1:57pm

ShooterSF wrote: »

A valid point made is even if say CU gets a small majority and May decides to take it up can we trust them to continue to support it as it gets fleshed out and negotiated. Whats to say 6 months into an extension that some MPs don't dislike the deal that is being negotiated and we're back to square one. If an abstract idea which is going to be subject to compromise with the EU has little support before hand it seems plausible that we get an agreement and again the HOC shoots it down.

I suspect what would happen is that no matter what's put on the table it will become a focus for Euro-hatred. All these proposals do is change the focus.

We've gone form raging against the EU in general, to raging against the backstop, then it would be raging against the customs union and demanding they aren't free enough to negotiate their own totally independent trade deals without any EU issues at all.

I think realistically at this stage, nothing is going to satisfy the hardliners other than a complete exit in a chaotic manner.

Even the pro-EU MPs are proposing so called 'soft brexits' that are complete cake-and-eat-it stuff absolutely laced with exceptionalism and one-sided opt-outs tat would be rather difficult for the EU to accept.

The consequences of that will be severe, but as much as I hate what it might do to Northern Ireland, I think these parties, including the DUP need to actually experience their own policies. I don't think this hardcore Euro-bashing can be resolved unless its outcome is actually lived by the population.

It might bring about a united Ireland too. Who knows!

I think Ireland will survive it, it'll be bumpy but we may even do fairly well out of it in the end by being positioned as the only significant English speaking EU member and being a US-EU bridge in may ways.

There comes a point where you just have to accept the reality that they're not really negotiating with anyone other than themselves and this farce is just going to go on and on and on until someone pulls the plug.

Peregrinus · 02-04-2019 1:57pm

ShooterSF wrote: »

Can you point me to where the confirmatory vote put forward mentions any details of what question would be asked. The people putting it forward seem very quiet about it. One Tory MP asked yesterday given that people had already voted leave would the confirmatory vote be between an agreed deal and no deal. The MP putting forward the motion refused to agree or disagree to that if memory serves.

Edit - I see from further posts that you are just making your best guess. Fair enough but I don't think it's a certainty.

Oh, I agree. It's just a fairly speculative stab at what kind of "merger" of anti-hard-Brexit positions might assemble a majority, based on the votes so far, and how it might play out if it did.

PropJoe10 · 02-04-2019 1:58pm

Leroy42 wrote: »

TBF, it is on the only legacy she can possibly achieve at this stage. Her time as PM will be remembered as totally ineffective, save for Brexit.

So does she leave with the Brexit question put back onto the converoy belt of take the risk that a No Deal won't be as bad as expected. She will be saved from any negative effects regardless, so it is probably worth the risk and she will at least have achieved something.

I'm not sure if crashing out of the EU without a deal would be much of a legacy, but I take your point. I've said it many times, but her biggest mistake has been pandering to the DUP and ERG for the last two years, instead of trying to work across the House to achieve compromise. And she's still doing it.

blanch152 · 02-04-2019 2:02pm

PropJoe10 wrote: »

I'm not sure if crashing out of the EU without a deal would be much of a legacy, but I take your point. I've said it many times, but her biggest mistake has been pandering to the DUP and ERG for the last two years, instead of trying to work across the House to achieve compromise. And she's still doing it.

I don't think that Labour were prepared to compromise at any stage. Corbyn wants power, even if it is a ruined rump England that he is in charge of.

PropJoe10 · 02-04-2019 2:04pm

blanch152 wrote: »

I don't think that Labour were prepared to compromise at any stage. Corbyn wants power, even if it is a ruined rump England that he is in charge of.

Labour are highly disorganised and hypocritical, but she should've at least reached out to find out what they might support. They do have proposals that could get some support in the House, but she totally ignored everyone and ploughed on regardless with a minority government. Crazy.

Anteayer · 02-04-2019 2:06pm

If you look at this from the EU perspective, which is our perspective as an EU member, what exactly are the UK bringing to the table?

You've a large % of the political spectrum over there hurling abuse at the EU or demanding that it bend to their will and turn itself inside out with reforms that seem to be nothing to do with a discussion, but just a list of demands.

Then you've other politicians actually threatening to dismantle it or otherwise damage it.

They've consistently undermined the development of the Eurozone and anything to do with regulation that might help it stablise because it threatened the dominance of the City of London wild west of modern capitalism.

I just don't really see what they're offering? "Let us have access to your markets so that we can undermine your members by refusing to play by any of the rules?"

They're showing the EU absolutely no solidarity whatsoever, just a whole load of hostility and outright hatred, the vast majority of which is based on nothing other than irrational nationalism.

Even their attitude towards Ireland has been appalling. They're showing scant regard for the hugely delicate situation in Northern Ireland, we've had MPs threaten to cut off our food supply, been told to "know our place" and that's just a few examples of the kind of snide nonsense being hurled our direction.
It's really not much of an offer.

Amirani · 02-04-2019 2:07pm

blanch152 wrote: »

I don't think that Labour were prepared to compromise at any stage. Corbyn wants power, even if it is a ruined rump England that he is in charge of.

They've shifted to compromise mode of late in fairness to them. The Tories haven't budged.

ShooterSF · 02-04-2019 2:11pm

Peregrinus wrote: »

Oh, I agree. It's just a fairly speculative stab at what kind of "merger" of anti-hard-Brexit positions might assemble a majority, based on the votes so far, and how it might play out if it did.

But do the parliament have the authority to word a referendum? Genuinely asking. My view would be TM would say confirmatory vote on the deal = Yes vs No and if no the govt will look at alternatives. Rather than offering remain or no deal to the people. She'd have some right to say it too as the motion put forward was not a "second referendum" or a "people's vote". Then again I'm lost as to why they didn't just table one of those as they aren't going to get many Tory votes anyway and it would have had a stronger right to put remain on a ballot.

Anteayer · 02-04-2019 2:12pm

To be fair, Angela has been pretty neutral on this and has been backing Ireland's position. I think the German centrist perspective is that concept of the EU is far more important than short term business concerns and that the UK will probably end up buying German products one way or the other anyway. They're not exactly price sensitive and people tend to buy them regardless.

There's been a constant UK notion that the Germans would somehow just knock the EU into the British way of thinking to protect German car exports to the UK. That seems to be a theory that's being repeatedly disproven as the Germans see the value of the EU institutions, particularly given their own history and the sense that the stability of Europe's of primary importance.

BorneTobyWilde · 02-04-2019 2:12pm

Has to be a compromise, May's deal is rejected time and time again. Why can't she give a little and add a customs union to her deal and pass the thing.

Brexit discussion thread VIII (Please read OP before posting)

Comments