Brexit discussion thread VIII (Please read OP before posting)

theguzman · 14-03-2019 12:52am

BLIZZARD7 wrote: »

A hard border, yes 100%. Reignition of paramilitary activity and a collapse of the GFA. An Economic nightmare for both the UK and Ireland too.

I don't think a softer border' is something easily achieved in reality , it would be unchartered territory.

The Good Friday Agreement has effectively served its purpose, and is now dead; the institutions are not in effect, Stormont is suspended due to Unionists refusal to agree to an Irish Language Act, we are no closer to the Reunification of Ireland than we were 20 years ago.

It served its purpose to stop the killing at the time. I certainly welcome a Hard Border from a Nationalist point of view to remind people that they haven't gone away, the Unionists are still the same bigots they were and will always be.

Let the Economic screw be turned on them and watch the Unionist Farmers and landowners squirm as they lose subsidies and everything else. Make a United Ireland be their economic salvation and ensure that our Irish citizens in the North get treated as equal citizens.

I want to see a United Ireland and with the return of the Hard Border it will help force the UI agenda firmly onto the table, either the Unionists in the North take this onboard or there is likely to be a return to violence again. Do I condone violence, absolutely not, but equally I will not be surprised if it happens as the days of moderate Unionism, pragmatism and compromise are dead and replaced with the same bigoted politics Paisley trumpeted back in his heyday. We need less Arlene Fosters and more David Trimble like characters. The DUP ofcourse hold the reigns of power in Westminster so have a free pass on whatever they want to do.

Quin_Dub · 14-03-2019 12:56am

cryptocurrency wrote: »

So article 62 of the Vienna Convention makes the withdrawal agreement worthless

No, no it doesn't..

Article 62 covers the scenario of a very long standing international agreement becoming no longer fit for purpose due to fundamental changes in circumstances, thereby allowing a party to said agreement to leave the deal.

Given that the WA isn't the final deal and merely the mechanism by which the final deal gets done, how on earth would Article 62 even pertain to it?

blanch152 · 14-03-2019 12:58am

Infini wrote: »

I'd be more accurate to say that no deal as a choice for parliment is dead but not a default crash no deal as of yet. It's the accidental crash out scenario if paralysis reigns.

The only options left are

Passing May's deal on a 3rd attempt but unlikely since its been defeated by significant margins and no further clarifications will be made. It's basically unpalatable at this stage and it doesnt regain any control.

Asking for an extention of A50 from Europe but this is also looking unlikely. They need a good reason for one to be granted and the EU have been clear enough: if they dont come up with a credible reason they wont allow it they'd rather be rid of them come March 29th than allow this farce to continue. They want a strait answer to be honest and its either leave, take the deal on the table at the last minute or just abandon this and they want an answer in 2 weeks or its the boot.

A complete climbdown on Brexit: Undeliverable, Unaffordable and Unworkable. They basically have to cancel by withdrawing A50 and admit defeat on the issue and go back to the people. The only ones pushing it are liar's, cheates and scammers it's not worth letting them destroy their country for a vainglorious project with no benefit.

To tell the Truth if they ever want a Brexit they can live with to be honest they need to basically lose Northern Ireland. That's the irony it's the fact they cant come to a workable arrangment and allowed THE party of headbangers into government that cost them as likely the agreement would have had a better chance of passing if NI was treated differently or if they even had a Border Poll.

I wouldn't be as pessimistic as that.

It is only the ERG and the DUP who want a Brexit with a hard border, the defeat of the Malthouse option killed that option. Losing Northern Ireland isn't needed anymore.

A no-deal Brexit is a much lower possibility than it was this morning as a result.

The EU will grant an extension if it is for the purpose of a Norway plus deal, or if it is for a referendum on May's deal, or if May's deal is passed the third time.

The big losers today were the ERG and the DUP. They just don't have the numbers to push their agenda. If the ERG want to break up the Conservative Party, then they keep going down their current road. If they don't, they row back and accept May's deal. If they break up the Conservative Party, there is a majority for a soft Brexit.

BlitzKrieg · 14-03-2019 1:01am

cryptocurrency wrote: »

This article 62 talk is a game changer...they are saying the ERG have their legal people all over it now.

the same legal experts who completely misread article 24 of the Gatt treaties and tried to push it at the start of the month as the solution to brexit and it basically got laughed out because they'd actually missed the part of it stating it required that both parties agree to use article 24 and one party couldnt use unilaterally.

yeah I look forward to more insight from those legal experts. I need a good chuckle now and then.

bilston · 14-03-2019 1:03am

I think many ERG Tories will do an about turn on May's deal now. Not sure it will be enough though, but MV3 could be close. She might get it through at a 4th attempt.

cryptocurrency · 14-03-2019 1:08am

Quin_Dub wrote: »

No, no it doesn't..

Article 62 covers the scenario of a very long standing international agreement becoming no longer fit for purpose due to fundamental changes in circumstances, thereby allowing a party to said agreement to leave the deal.

Given that the WA isn't the final deal and merely the mechanism by which the final deal gets done, how on earth would Article 62 even pertain to it?

I'll wait to see what advice Cox says on it. He was asked on it twice today and was positive for it to be used as a get out option. It will gain traction tomorrow.
It will be funny if that is the case as all this has been over a worthless document.
It was mentioned the US has used it to walk from many deals.

cryptocurrency · 14-03-2019 1:10am

bilston wrote: »

I think many ERG Tories will do an about turn on May's deal now. Not sure it will be enough though, but MV3 could be close. She might get it through at a 4th attempt.

Can't see it. One of the MPs called it trecherous on LBC tonight, expect that to be news.

UK needs a general election now. The UK is about to change for ever and the EU need to be aware of that.

CelticRambler · 14-03-2019 1:11am

Strazdas wrote: »

It would be like you announcing you were quitting your job, selling your home and moving to Mali for good. "Moving to Mali to do what?" and you reply "I don't know, I just know I'm moving to Mali on March 29th".

Not sure that's a great analogy - that pretty much describes my move to France 15 years ago, and it's working out OK.

milhous wrote:

The leader of the house said that article 50 wil not be revoked as it would go against the will of the people ...

That's just one person's opinion. Ultimately, the "will of the people" is exercised by their elected representatives acting collectively. If a majority of those decide to instruct the PM to revoke Art.50, then that is effectively the will of the people.

tuxy · 14-03-2019 1:12am

bilston wrote: »

I think many ERG Tories will do an about turn on May's deal now. Not sure it will be enough though, but MV3 could be close. She might get it through at a 4th attempt.

It would be close but MV3 will not get over the line without the backing of the DUP or a number of opposition members who May has never make any attempt to communicate with thus far.

CelticRambler · 14-03-2019 1:16am

cryptocurrency wrote: »

It was mentioned the US has used it to walk from many deals.

C'mon - you know how things work here: name one of them.

briany · 14-03-2019 1:19am

tuxy wrote: »

It would be close but MV3 will not get over the line without the backing of the DUP or a number of opposition members who May has never make any attempt to communicate with thus far.

The gas thing is that May could have reached out to Labour and gotten ideas from which would have worked for her anyway, like the customs union thing. Anything for Labour to be able to say that they had input on the deal and were therefore happy with it.

blanch152 · 14-03-2019 1:21am

cryptocurrency wrote: »

This article 62 talk is a game changer...they are saying the ERG have their legal people all over it now.

That is just desperation. Can you tell me how many times Article 62 has been used before?

Can you tell me how an obscure part of the Vienna Convention can be invoked?

I can tell you one thing - the recourse to Article 62 is a sign of the increased desperation of the hard Brexiteers.

15 days to go but the options are closing in, extend to implement May's deal, extend to negotiate a Norway plus deal, revoke Article 50 or ?????

blanch152 · 14-03-2019 1:26am

cryptocurrency wrote: »

I'll wait to see what advice Cox says on it. He was asked on it twice today and was positive for it to be used as a get out option. It will gain traction tomorrow.
It will be funny if that is the case as all this has been over a worthless document.
It was mentioned the US has used it to walk from many deals.

The only get out option it has is for the ERG and the DUP to climb down off their high horses and accept May's deal. Today's votes have told them that's the best deal they are getting. If someone can issue a statement that in some legal extremis there is a unilateral clause, they will grasp that like drowning swimmers.

Blowfish · 14-03-2019 1:27am

cryptocurrency wrote: »

Quin_Dub wrote: »

No, no it doesn't..

Article 62 covers the scenario of a very long standing international agreement becoming no longer fit for purpose due to fundamental changes in circumstances, thereby allowing a party to said agreement to leave the deal.

Given that the WA isn't the final deal and merely the mechanism by which the final deal gets done, how on earth would Article 62 even pertain to it?

I'll wait to see what advice Cox says on it. He was asked on it twice today and was positive for it to be used as a get out option. It will gain traction tomorrow.
It will be funny if that is the case as all this has been over a worthless document.
It was mentioned the US has used it to walk from many deals.

It's a non runner, according to the HoC's own research: http://researchbriefings.files.parliament.uk/documents/CBP-8463/CBP-8463.pdf

madmaggie · 14-03-2019 1:32am

I just find the whole Brexit idea very sad. I'm originally from England, and it feels like the UK is somewhere very far away now, instead of being just next door. After all the work in recent years to establish good relations between the two countries, and to see it descend into nastiness and bitterness, what a disappointment.

BlitzKrieg · 14-03-2019 1:41am

Blowfish wrote: »

It's a non runner, according to the HoC's own research: http://researchbriefings.files.parliament.uk/documents/CBP-8463/CBP-8463.pdf

is anyone actually surprised?

It feels like the ERG is just googling random articles at this point.

FrancieBrady · 14-03-2019 1:49am

madmaggie wrote: »

I just find the whole Brexit idea very sad. I'm originally from England, and it feels like the UK is somewhere very far away now, instead of being just next door. After all the work in recent years to establish good relations between the two countries, and to see it descend into nastiness and bitterness, what a disappointment.

TBH and I feel for anybody reasonable or moderate - northern Irish, Scottish, Welsh or English, I have said this before, I think history will see this as part of the break-up of the UK, begining with the GFA and then the Scottish Indy Ref.

There are many who think we are playing towards an end here, but we aren't, there are years of trade negotiations if the UK succeeds in the WA, which will be far more contentious and divisive and if they don't manage to Brexit the internal conflicts will drive even more division. Either way, not very happy days ahead.

Strazdas · 14-03-2019 1:50am

madmaggie wrote: »

I just find the whole Brexit idea very sad. I'm originally from England, and it feels like the UK is somewhere very far away now, instead of being just next door. After all the work in recent years to establish good relations between the two countries, and to see it descend into nastiness and bitterness, what a disappointment.

I saw someone in one of the British papers this week describe Brexit as a front for nationalism and xenophobia - no matter how much its cheerleaders try and deny this.

20silkcut · 14-03-2019 2:15am

2 things :

Geofferey Cox has a voice like something out of a Star Wars movie.
If you close your eyes and listen you’d swear it was Darth Vader. They must be the same person.

I can’t get John bercow shouting “ order order “ out of my head.

I use it while I’m out feeding the cattle.
Shouting awwder awwder at them works a treat.

Peregrinus · 14-03-2019 2:46am

Duane Dibbley wrote: »

I don’t think anyone wants it to happen but it’s a fact when one side is in the EU and One side is removed against there will. (NI voted remain)

It will be for NI to decide what they want to do if there is a no deal brexit.

Or the Republic to decide on EU membership in the event of a no deal.

The latter will not be a difficult decision.

black forest · 14-03-2019 2:47am

As an extension of Art50 seems inevitable here a little bit of background.

Next to Sir Ivan Rogers there is another extremely valuable source for EU and UK Law. Eleanor Sharpston is a British QC and since 2006 Advocate General at the EU Court of Justice in Luxembourg. When she is writing about the actual situation it is worth reading.

https://twitter.com/akulith/status/1105976757499367424?s=21

As the thread is quite long here comes part two:

https://twitter.com/akulith/status/1105978993491263488?s=21

At the end she offers two possibilities how a real long extension beyond the EU elections is possible. Of course this needs a lot of goodwill from the EU and quite a bit of line jumping by the UK.

28. An entire provision – Article 19 – was devoted to increasing membership of the EP so as to accommodate Croatian MEPs before the date of the next EP elections. In so doing, the Parties derogated from otherwise mandatory Treaty provisions.

29. One way of ensuring continuing UK representation in the EP during an Article 50 extension might therefore be for the UK to agree with the EU just to extend the mandates of the UK MEPs who have already been democratically elected and who have been sitting in the current EP.

30. Another possible solution might be to revert to the (old Parliamentary Assembly) practice of sending nominated MPs from the UK, rather than directly elected MEPs, to participate in the EP during that period.

31. No doubt other mechanisms could be envisaged also. What would be necessary would be to ensure that the EU-27 could go ahead and elect a new EP as scheduled, and to arrange for the British MEPs to sit in that new EP as additional members on a temporary ‘Brexit-limited’ basis.

32. I am naturally not advocating any particular mechanism or any particular course of action. But if the political will to agree a longer Article 50 TEU extension is there, a legal mechanism can be found to accommodate that desire and ‘deal with’ the issue of the EP elections.

It would be a fantastic gimmick if the UK would listen to its own experts. There are quite a few available and willing to contribute. Might be helpful to look beyond the heads of ones own party.

Peregrinus · 14-03-2019 2:52am

Duane Dibbley wrote: »

I would agree that there should be some type of NoDeal implementation period after the 29th. We have had nearly 3 years to prepare and if we haven’t then that is the incompetence of our Govenment.

There has been a good deal of quiet planning and preparation.

But it has had to be quiet, becuase IrlGov's public line has been that, even in a no deal situation, we expect the UK to honour their no-hard-border commitment. Of course we know damn well they won't; it's a contradiction in terms. But it would have been inflammatory and unhelpful to say so out loud.

The upshot of all this is that practical preparations for border control are probably further advanced than public realisation/acceptance. So even if no-deal Brexit is judged to be inevitable a short delay might be useful to enable some repositioning of public opinion in Ireland, to accept the necessity for border controls in the event that the UK chooses to crash out, and to develop some degree of cross-party consensus on how to manage this, and how to position ourselves to push for further changes that would ameliorate the position. (I.e. what does Ireland to to maximise the incentives for the UK to change its position so that border controls can be elilminated again?)

Peregrinus · 14-03-2019 3:14am

Necro wrote: »

Is it wrong that I have an extremely morbid curiosity to see how a no deal Brexit would pan out? I can't help being fascinated by the lunacy of it all

Be like watching a toddler driving an 18-wheeler. Hugely amusing for a few minutes, but you know it's going to end very badly.

Peregrinus · 14-03-2019 3:20am

FrancieBrady wrote: »

TBH and I feel for anybody reasonable or moderate - northern Irish, Scottish, Welsh or English, I have said this before, I think history will see this as part of the break-up of the UK, begining with the GFA and then the Scottish Indy Ref.

Began in 1922, surely?

Junkyard Tom · 14-03-2019 3:52am

The Brexit bus of bullshit dismantled with Teutonic efficiency starring Nigel Ferengi and all the main myths.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I_HdqYCDcVE

14-03-2019 6:08am

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/mar/13/brexiters-lobby-for-european-veto-of-article-50-extension

Brexiters lobby for European veto of article 50 extension
Veto by a country such as Italy or Poland could lead to a no-deal Brexit this month

Insanity. How are they even allowed to lobby other countries to subvert their own government's aims?

Peregrinus · 14-03-2019 6:33am

Deleted User wrote: »

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/mar/13/brexiters-lobby-for-european-veto-of-article-50-extension

Brexiters lobby for European veto of article 50 extension
Veto by a country such as Italy or Poland could lead to a no-deal Brexit this month

Insanity. How are they even allowed to lobby other countries to subvert their own government's aims?

Well, I don't know about insane, but it's certainly hypocritical, given that a large part of the case for Brexit is an objection to other countries having any kind of control or influence over UK affairs. But now they call on foreign powers to frustrate the will of the UK parliament and government.

But, whether insane or hypocrtical, I think it's going to be counterproductive. No EU government, however eurosceptic itself, is going to want to be seen to be doing the bidding of the fringes of the UK's domestic opposition. Those governments each have a responsibility to act in the best interests of their countries, and they are accountable to their voters. They might or might not be receptive to a little behind-the-scenes lobbying from UK eurosceptics, but once the pressure is public it become more difficult, not less difficult, to comply.

This isn't the first time it's been tried. In January noted bonehead Daniel Kawczynski MP wrote to the Polish government (he himself is Polish, so he feels an affinity, plus the Polish government is fairly right-wing) asking them to block any extension of A50 that the UK might ask for. He was not, as the saying goes, favoured with a reply to his letter, but a couple of days later a Polish government spokesman was quoted as saying that a no-deal Brexit would be the worst possible scenario for Poland, and any request for an extension that might avert it would likely be favourably evaluated.

upupup · 14-03-2019 6:37am

20silkcut wrote: »

2 things :

Geofferey Cox has a voice like something out of a Star Wars movie.
If you close your eyes and listen you’d swear it was Darth Vader. They must be the same person.

I can’t get John bercow shouting “ order order “ out of my head.

I use it while I’m out feeding the cattle.
Shouting awwder awwder at them works a treat.

Be careful with the Bercow impersonations,You might catch a dose of Brexit and end up feeding Unicorns!

Mr.Wemmick · 14-03-2019 6:48am

20silkcut wrote: »

2 things :

Geofferey Cox has a voice like something out of a Star Wars movie.
If you close your eyes and listen you’d swear it was Darth Vader. They must be the same person.

I can’t get John bercow shouting “ order order “ out of my head.

I use it while I’m out feeding the cattle.
Shouting awwder awwder at them works a treat.

I have been using it to great effect with the kids, re: homework, shower time, bedtime.. completed homework, do the noes have it or the ayes?!

Bellowing bercow is a welcome addition to family life. Bet your cattle are loving it.

Enzokk · 14-03-2019 8:42am

cryptocurrency wrote: »

So article 62 of the Vienna Convention makes the withdrawal agreement worthless. If this is shown as the case you may see the ERG come on board knowing the WA is 500 pages of Andrex.

Yes, that is what you need to do. Show your most important negotiating partner for the next 5-10 years that you will at any moment just get rid of a painstakingly negotiated agreement while you are trying to negotiate an even more complex and difficult trade agreement.

The EU has been telling the UK politicians since the start of the negotiations that trust is the most important factor when negotiating, yet the UK seems intent on showing to the EU that they cannot be trusted.

Brexit discussion thread VIII (Please read OP before posting)

Comments