Brexit Referendum Superthread

BoatMad

Patser wrote: »

Boris Johnson the new Foreign Minister!

The mind boggles. I've seen a quote that they're expecting him to work his charm on European leaders as part of the Brexit negotiations. He's been openly mocking the EU for decades, he frequently made up stuff for the Telegraph about non-existent EU regulations (under 8s not allowed inflate balloons) , he's lead a campaign against EU membership and now he's back to work his charm!!!

Charm! Compared to Farage's input in Brussels last week maybe but the likes of Schultz doesn't deal in charm, just facts.

It's all part of death wish uk.

BorisTheSpider

Patser wrote: »

Boris Johnson the new Foreign Minister!

The mind boggles. I've seen a quote that they're expecting him to work his charm on European leaders as part of the Brexit negotiations. He's been openly mocking the EU for decades, he frequently made up stuff for the Telegraph about non-existent EU regulations (under 8s not allowed inflate balloons) , he's lead a campaign against EU membership and now he's back to work his charm!!!

Charm! Compared to Farage's input in Brussels last week maybe but the likes of Schultz doesn't deal in charm, just facts.

I think it's a fantastic appointment. It sends out a clear message that we are going to do what we voted to do. (Whatever that was).

Patser

BorisTheSpider wrote: »

I think it's a fantastic appointment. It sends out a clear message that we are going to do what we voted to do. (Whatever that was).

Your username suggests bias....:P

BorisTheSpider

BoatMad wrote: »

It's all part of death wish uk.

Mad indeed ! Death wish to leave the EU ? Lol ! the very same EU that takes 5 years to decide anything, that destroyed the Greek Economy and will have our children paying for the damage it did to the Irish Economy. Put your money where your mouth is and buy a few Italian Bank Shares !

Lemming

I'm fairly certain I've not taken any hallucinogenic substances, but I'm struggling to comprehend that BBC headline right now ....

Patser

Rudd as home Secretary - a remain campaigner who said she didn't trust Boris to drive her home

Boris as foreign minister.

May trying to glue the Tories back together? Get in both sides, try and sort it all out rather than gave a split party.

swampgas

Lemming wrote: »

I'm fairly certain I've not taken any hallucinogenic substances, but I'm struggling to comprehend that BBC headline right now ....

Possibly a move to maintain some party unity. It's either brilliant or bonkers.

Lemming

swampgas wrote: »

Possibly a move to maintain some party unity. It's either brilliant or bonkers.

TBH, someone somewhere has a sense of humour .... BoJo is the Foreign minster, and Liam Fox is the new International trade minister. I have a ferverent prayer that that May is machavellian enough to have kept her enemies close so they can be destroyed on the alter of failure in full view of the public.

Firefox11

Lemming wrote: »

TBH, someone somewhere has a sense of humour .... BoJo is the Foreign minster, and Liam Fox is the new International trade minister. I have a ferverent prayer that that May is machavellian enough to have kept her enemies close so they can be destroyed on the alter of failure in full view of the public.

Yes it seems the political games continue and to hell with UK national interests.

Peist2007

swampgas wrote: »

Possibly a move to maintain some party unity. It's either brilliant or bonkers.

And the added caveat that it keeps Boris in the front line. Hand the man enough rope etc

Lemming

Firefox11 wrote: »

Yes it seems the political games continue and to hell with UK national interests.

On one sense, yes you're right; on the other this sets the whole triggering of article 50 up for failure and abandonment when it becomes ever more apparent that there isn't nor will be a better deal on the table any time soon or in the foreseeable future.

amacca

Lemming wrote: »

On one sense, yes you're right; on the other this sets the whole triggering of article 50 up for failure and abandonment when it becomes ever more apparent that there isn't nor will be a better deal on the table any time soon or in the foreseeable future.

Agreed - I think there is deeper game here and thats a big part of it.

Bit cynical

Wasn't that the main criticism of Boris and the others, that they were cowards and would not take any sort of part managing the EuExit. Now the same people are upset that he is Foreign Secretary and will have a central role in seeing Brexit through.

embraer170

Bit cynical wrote: »

Wasn't that the main criticism of Boris and the others, that they were cowards and would not take any sort of part managing the EuExit. Now the same people are upset that he is Foreign Secretary and will have a central role in seeing Brexit through.

But he won't since Brexit will not be dealt with by the Foreign Office.

Patser

Bit cynical wrote: »

Wasn't that the main criticism of Boris and the others, that they were cowards and would not take any sort of part managing the EuExit. Now the same people are upset that he is Foreign Secretary and will have a central role in seeing Brexit through.

You're right. I've often said I'd a theory that Boris and Gove orchestrated a little soap opera to get them off the Brexit hook. That's blown a bit since he's now in a position at least partly responsible for negotiating Brexit. All 3 positions closest linked to Brexit now held by prominent Leavers. May seems to be holding them to their commitments.

Bob24

Deleted User wrote: »

And we're off http://parliamentlive.tv/Event/Index/edd13153-7ed7-48b3-9643-472e6be0462e

Interesting how they seem to say the 2 years deadline in article 50 is almost irrelevant as in this type of negotiations artificial deadlines are never followed as long as there is a common interest for both paries to reach a deal (which they seem to think will be the case).

Zaph

Patser wrote: »

Boris Johnson the new Foreign Minister!

The mind boggles. I've seen a quote that they're expecting him to work his charm on European leaders as part of the Brexit negotiations. He's been openly mocking the EU for decades, he frequently made up stuff for the Telegraph about non-existent EU regulations (under 8s not allowed inflate balloons) , he's lead a campaign against EU membership and now he's back to work his charm!!!

Charm! Compared to Farage's input in Brussels last week maybe but the likes of Schultz doesn't deal in charm, just facts.

On the plus side from May's point of view is that he'll probably be out of the country a fair bit more than if she'd given him any other cabinet post.

Bit cynical

Patser wrote: »

You're right. I've often said I'd a theory that Boris and Gove orchestrated a little soap opera to get them off the Brexit hook. That's blown a bit since he's now in a position at least partly responsible for negotiating Brexit. All 3 positions closest linked to Brexit now held by prominent Leavers. May seems to be holding them to their commitments.

You don't think she thinks they are the best for the job? You think she is appointing them in the hope that they will fail?

I don't think so. I don't think she sees it as a game. Although she was nominally on the Remain side, she is now fully committed to Brexit and is expected to see it through successfully. It is what the people want and she is mandated to do. If the three she's appointed fail fail then she and the rest of her government will suffer politically.

If course she may be wrong in appointing these three, but I doubt very much that she's hoping that they fail or show themselves up in some way.

embraer170

David Davis is delusional:

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/david-davis-who-is-minister-for-brexit-theresa-may-new-cabinet-a7135431.html
What David Davis, the new minister for Brexit, has said about his vision for leaving the EU

We can do deals with our trading partners, and we can do them quickly. I would expect the new Prime Minister on September 9th to immediately trigger a large round of global trade deals with all our most favoured trade partners. I would expect that the negotiation phase of most of them to be concluded within between 12 and 24 months

The ideal outcome is continued tariff-free access. Once the European nations realise that we are not going to budge on control of our borders, they will want to talk, in their own interest.

mickoneill31

Bob24 wrote: »

Interesting how they seem to say the 2 years deadline in article 50 is almost irrelevant as in this type of negotiations artificial deadlines are never followed as long as there is a common interest for both paries to reach a deal (which they seem to think will be the case).

To get an extension of the two years all the other 27 states have to agree. I can't see that happening. There's always one.

Patser

Bit cynical wrote: »

You don't think she thinks they are the best for the job? You think she is appointing them in the hope that they will fail?

I don't think so. I don't think she sees it as a game. Although she was nominally on the Remain side, she is now fully committed to Brexit and is expected to see it through successfully. It is what the people want and she is mandated to do. If the three she's appointed fail fail then she and the rest of her government will suffer politically.

If course she may be wrong in appointing these three, but I doubt very much that she's hoping that they fail or show themselves up in some way.

I doubt she wants them to fail because as you said, if they fail her Govt fails. Maybe it's simply a case of putting those most committed to the idea in charge of it.

But Boris' appointment and Davis' ( who's been out of cabinet since the 90s) still confuse people and throw lots of pressure onto May right from the get go. I don't think Boris is in anyway the best man for the in depth pressure negotiations ahead - although his actual Ministry could see him easily sidelined. I've little idea what Davis has or has not to offer.

With the obvious uncertainty ahead making a clear plan murky, these new appointments really leave everything up to guesses as to why they're there. Maybe it's internal Tory politics, maybe May (who up until 3 days ago was expecting to be in a leadership campaign, not actually PM on Wednesday) hasn't a clear plan formed, maybe it'll be a masterstroke. But for my opinion Boris is a poor appointment, from Victor, to coward, to Minister in 2 weeks, he's a magnet for press coverage for any slip up that'll bounce back on May. Regardless of the poor standing he'll have amongst European ministers.

Ps Next meeting of European Foreign Ministers is on Monday, we'll see how Boris does then.

A Dub in Glasgo

https://twitter.com/BBCNews/status/753342815053156352

Bob24

mickoneill31 wrote: »

To get an extension of the two years all the other 27 states have to agree. I can't see that happening. There's always one.

That's what I thought ... but if you watch the video all witnesses seem to contradict that (especially Hosuk Lee-Makiyama who is quite adament deadlines in international trade negotiations are always very artificial and rarely met).

oppenheimer1

Deleted User wrote: »

The UK will not go to the back of any queue. If they were to, it would be a prime example of cutting off one's nose to spite one's face.

We (EU members) do enormous business with the UK, and so will want to continue that and have as little change as possible, as soon after Brexit as is physically possible.

The delays will not come from the EU side in any case, the EU 'case' is straightforward. "We have a great package to offer, but you no longer want that, here are the other options available which we have worked on for many years. The pros and cons are well known. Which do you want?". Any changes to those deals that the UK want will have to come from their side, and then offered to the EU side to consider. There is little-to-no work to be done on the EU side until that is done.

If, when that is done, and the 'UK Third Country plan' negotiations have finally began, some members delay the process or interfere unnecessarily, that will cost us all time, us all money, us all investment, us all market confidence, us all certainty. All for what exactly?

The common good and particular nations national interests do not often align.

Every country in the EU will want to attract the investment that would have been destined for the UK. There may also be domestic issues in EU countries where taking a tough line against the UK could prove a useful diversion. The UK's exit will not be smooth sailing for the UK, and I often think because we are exposed to the british media that we too are falling for the belief that the UK is stronger and more important than the union and the union will bend over backwards to accommodate the UK.

There will be plenty that will be more than happy to twist the knife in the UK's self inflicted wound - as long as its in their national interest.

K-9

Bob24 wrote: »

Interesting how they seem to say the 2 years deadline in article 50 is almost irrelevant as in this type of negotiations artificial deadlines are never followed as long as there is a common interest for both paries to reach a deal (which they seem to think will be the case).

I suppose if talks are progressing the 2 year deadline wont really matter. If they aren't to the other 27 countries liking, Britain imposing unreasonable conditions for example, I'd expect the threat of termination of talks to be used.

K-9

Bit cynical wrote: »

You don't think she thinks they are the best for the job? You think she is appointing them in the hope that they will fail?

I don't think so. I don't think she sees it as a game. Although she was nominally on the Remain side, she is now fully committed to Brexit and is expected to see it through successfully. It is what the people want and she is mandated to do. If the three she's appointed fail fail then she and the rest of her government will suffer politically.

If course she may be wrong in appointing these three, but I doubt very much that she's hoping that they fail or show themselves up in some way.

Probably politics as much as anything else. Keep your enemies close and all that!

Bit cynical

K-9 wrote: »

Probably politics as much as anything else. Keep your enemies close and all that!

I think we need to recognise in ourselves a tendency to continue fighting the referendum even though it is over. The mistake is to assume others are doing the same.

May and Boris were on opposite sides of the referendum and therefore "enemies" in that sense. But now the referendum is over and they are no longer in rival camps. May fully accepts the result of that referendum.

I don't think there was ever any evidence that there was any personal enmity between them other than normal political rivalry and ambition.

I think another mistake is to assume that just because May was in the Remain camp during the referendum that she was an ardent ideological pro-EU fanatic. Like a lot of people, she was probably in two minds about a lot of EU issues but had to pick a side and defend it. On the other side, Boris was often accused of not being truly anti-EU but merely used popular anti-EU public sentiment to further his own career.

I would concede that there's politics involved. BoJo did deliver the Leave result and it would be impossible to for May not to give posts to some of the Leave group. But if it was purely a "keep your enemy close" thing then she would have given Johnson a lower profile position where she could still keep an eye on him but he wouldn't be as powerful.

molloyjh

A Dub in Glasgo wrote: »

https://twitter.com/BBCNews/status/753342815053156352

This could be hilarious. He's well known for his gaffes and the thoughts of him being put out there as their face to the world is just bizarre. Can he really be trusted to build, develop and foster relationships?

Bob24

K-9 wrote: »

I suppose if talks are progressing the 2 year deadline wont really matter. If they aren't to the other 27 countries liking, Britain imposing unreasonable conditions for example, I'd expect the threat of termination of talks to be used.

Agreed, but on the other hand listening to what Hosuk Lee-Makiyama is saying about half way through the video, according to him reaching that break-up point would be a failure for everyone and would be a sign that EU and UK negotiation teams are very poor and aren't even able to express their interest clearly to the other party (according to him there is a very clear interest for both parties to sign a deal as advanced as possible and from his experience with this type of talks this pretty much always means artificial deadlines don't matter).

Now of course he could be wrong because he never experienced something quite like that, or the negotiation team could indeed be bad.

Zubeneschamali

Bob24 wrote: »

That's what I thought ... but if you watch the video all witnesses seem to contradict that (especially Hosuk Lee-Makiyama who is quite adament deadlines in international trade negotiations are always very artificial and rarely met).

The deadline is on Brexit - 2 years after article 50 is activated, they are out.

There is no deadline on trade negotiations, it could take 10 years to settle the UKs new relationship with the EU.