Brexit Referendum Superthread

Thomas_...

alastair wrote: »

Tusk's reading is more likely to be that the choices are a hard brexit, no brexit, or the inevitable compromise of a soft brexit that fails to deliver all the demands of the brexiteers, because there was no consensus amongst the 'out' voters as to what that actually entailed. May will talk tough, probably beyond the point where the obvious EEA arrangement is accepted. Tusk will accommodate the fiction of a black and white choice so the compromise looks like a victory of sorts for the UK.


The weakest link in this whole negotiation are the Brexiteers. It's on their backs that the concessions will be made, while they're soft soaped with well chosen words.

That's well put and I see it that way too.

djpbarry

A Tyrant Named Miltiades! wrote: »

I've been down this road already and explained it umpteen times. I am not suggesting that workers are reassigned or blocked from sophisticated industry.

I’m not saying that you did.

A Tyrant Named Miltiades! wrote: »

I am simply suggesting that if British-EU trade barriers remain in place, the growth in export of sophisticated goods and services is unlikely to continue, and may even diminish in the medium term. If so, corporate investment will be directed to the sector with the next-lowest opportunity cost, which is manufacturing of less sophisticated goods and services, which may by then be competitive on account of the trade barriers that are already in place, and may increase.

Ok, but I’m not really seeing how there’s going to be increased investment in less sophisticated goods and services in the event of trade barriers being imposed? Even if those goods and services are targeted at the domestic market, demand for them is likely to be reduced post-Brexit.

djpbarry

KingBrian2 wrote: »

What's this I hear that the UK is not going to be consulting parliament on the decision of the British people. Was not the whole point to bring democracy back to Westminster. This is what it is about so. Let the MP's not the MEP's make up their mind.

According to Priti Patel, allowing a parliamentary debate on what exactly Brexit should entail would amount to “using Parliament as a vehicle to subvert the democratic will of the British people.”

The mind boggles.

djpbarry

flogthebog wrote: »

A so called 'hard brexit' damages certainty, damages trade and damages the EU as much as it damages the UK.

No, it does not damage the EU as much – this is the point.

Nobody benefits from Brexit, but the UK has far, far more to lose than the EU does. The markets agree, hence the slide in value of Sterling verus the Euro.

djpbarry

For anyone who may have missed it, Boris' pro-EU Telegraph article has been published:

There are some big questions that the “out” side need to answer. Almost everyone expects there to be some sort of economic shock as a result of a Brexit. How big would it be? I am sure that the doomsters are exaggerating the fallout — but are they completely wrong? And how can we know?

And then there is the worry about Scotland, and the possibility that an English-only “leave” vote could lead to the break-up of the union. There is the Putin factor: we don’t want to do anything to encourage more shirtless swaggering from the Russian leader, not in the Middle East, not anywhere.

And then there is the whole geostrategic anxiety. Britain is a great nation, a global force for good. It is surely a boon for the world and for Europe that she should be intimately engaged in the EU. This is a market on our doorstep, ready for further exploitation by British firms: the membership fee seems rather small for all that access.

Why are we so determined to turn our back on it? Shouldn’t our policy be like our policy on cake — pro having it and pro eating it? Pro Europe and pro the rest of the world?

http://www.irishtimes.com/news/world/uk/why-the-uk-would-be-better-off-in-europe-by-brexiteer-boris-johnson-1.2831608

amacca

I know this isn't a forum where feelings count for much!

But does anyone else get a feeling that ultimately Brexit won't actually occur?

ancapailldorcha

amacca wrote: »

I know this isn't a forum where feelings count for much!

But does anyone else get a feeling that ultimately Brexit won't actually occur?

I did but that was before May gave next March as a deadline and began talking about a "Hard Brexit". She seems to hate the ECHR more than the EU itself.

Nody

amacca wrote: »

But does anyone else get a feeling that ultimately Brexit won't actually occur?

I expect them to leave and reapply to join back within a decade of leaving on a fast track route. I expect the "We'll join EU again" to be the tagline of one or two parties but it will take at least two election cycles before they get the power to do so.

oscarBravo

Rejoining the EU would be a challenge. Membership of the Euro is a non-negotiable entry criterion for new member states, and I don't know how much of an appetite there would be for allowing the UK back in on the basis of yet more special treatment.

Enzokk

oscarBravo wrote: »

Rejoining the EU would be a challenge. Membership of the Euro is a non-negotiable entry criterion for new member states, and I don't know how much of an appetite there would be for allowing the UK back in on the basis of yet more special treatment.

I think the if the UK asks to re-apply to the EU they will not be in a position of power to negotiate so they will have to accept the terms that are given to them. The GBP may just be at parity or worse at that time in any case.

Zubeneschamali

oscarBravo wrote: »

Membership of the Euro is a non-negotiable entry criterion for new member states, and I don't know how much of an appetite there would be for allowing the UK back in on the basis of yet more special treatment.

No special treatment, they can forget the "rebate" that Thatcher negotiated.

But if they apply reasonably quickly, their laws should not have gotten too far out of shape, and they could fast-track back in. it would be best for everyone.

Expensive for them, but not as expensive as being out in the cold. See Boris's column for why.

Nody

oscarBravo wrote: »

Rejoining the EU would be a challenge. Membership of the Euro is a non-negotiable entry criterion for new member states, and I don't know how much of an appetite there would be for allowing the UK back in on the basis of yet more special treatment.

I'd guess they would get an exception on the GBP for "historical reasons" and it would speed up the fast tracking of things (they need to be at a locked rate for what two years and remain within a certain limit etc. which would delay things). I agree most other exceptions would go though (i.e. rebate, exceptions to certain laws such as schengen etc.)

Montpelier Hill

Suggestion that Brexit may not happen I think is way off the mark, Conservative party have put too much on the line politically for this not to happen now. Only a change of government would delay or maybe change their relationship with Europe.

Similarly talk of the UK reapplying to the EU in the future is fanciful to say the least, although this may be comforting to those eho believe the UK is taking the wrong path, it could be very difficult for the UK to save 'face' and reapply.

Zubeneschamali

Montpelier Hill wrote: »

it could be very difficult for the UK to save 'face' and reapply.

It would be very difficult for the Leave politicians to rejoin, but seriously, who are they? A blond clown and a bunch of nobodies. If the economy suffers the way I think it will, or the UK buckles and accepts a Norway deal with all the costs and less control, in 10 years people will be saying WTF? and reapplying will look sensible.

Of course if the UK thrives outside the EU, this will seem less reasonable. I wish them luck in the new UK-Elfland free trade zone.

ancapailldorcha

Appears that a hard Brext involving a reversion to WTO rules (which include tariffs and non-tariff barriers) seems to be May's preferred option. This is the prophesied "Hard Brexit". Incidentally, the UK will have to apply for WTO membership which will involve avoiding being vetoed by other members and re-negotiate the several dozen trade deals the EU has signed with other countries including South Korea.

amacca

So no chance May was hoping her hard brexit statement would lead to people understanding more fully the negative personal implications for them and lead to more people calling for Britain to reverse decision, ignore result, find a way to wriggle out of doing it, essentially not to leave then? ...it didn't seem like a great negotiation tactic and I can't imagine her being stupid :pac:

I know little or nothing I'll admit but I just think with all the potential for upheaval, disruption and most importantly loss of income/decrease in asset value that many voters could experience etc that has been talked about in media etc......if you held the referendum now the result would be different

Whats to stop them having a second referendum after a period of hand wringing and soul searching if the right groundwork is laid?? or finding some mechanism to save face and ignore the referendum results..or are the latter two mutually exclusive

Zubeneschamali

amacca wrote: »

Whats to stop them having a second referendum after a period of hand wringing and soul searching if the right groundwork is laid?? or finding some mechanism to save face and ignore the referendum results..or are the latter two mutually exclusive

The referendum isn't even binding. May could just ignore it if she dared - no legal consequence at all.

Of course the Brexiteers in her party would go mental. Which is what this is really about, and why I have limited sympathy for voters in the UK.

You could have had PR if ye were paying attention, dopey, and this wouldn't even be a question.

Lemming

Dumbfounding to believe that this is all the result of an internal party politik-feud; the national interest be damned.

alastair

Montpelier Hill wrote: »

Suggestion that Brexit may not happen I think is way off the mark, Conservative party have put too much on the line politically for this not to happen now. Only a change of government would delay or maybe change their relationship with Europe.

Similarly talk of the UK reapplying to the EU in the future is fanciful to say the least, although this may be comforting to those eho believe the UK is taking the wrong path, it could be very difficult for the UK to save 'face' and reapply.

I agree broadly, but remember that the UK already lost face by initially not engaging with the EEC, and then being rebuffed when they sought entry. They managed to get over that humiliation (sort of). They could do the same again, if they needed to.

Nody

Montpelier Hill wrote: »

Similarly talk of the UK reapplying to the EU in the future is fanciful to say the least, although this may be comforting to those eho believe the UK is taking the wrong path, it could be very difficult for the UK to save 'face' and reapply.

The current leadership and party will not go for it but for example Labour (if they can sort themselves out) could take it up as a rallying cry for an election esp. since it would resonate with a large portion of the population and help in Scotland, NI, London etc. That's where I see such an application coming from and due to Labour's state is why I said probably two election cycles (I don't expect them to be ready by next election short of a miracle). It will all come down to what happens after leaving EU obviously as already noted by Zubeneschamali.

Wicklow Will

I think, given the UK is our largest single trading partner, Ireland should think of holding a Keave /Remain referendum too. We'd be better off aligning ourselves with the UK and with the USA and Canada as the next two most significant players where Rep Ireland is concerned we'd be better off. It would also address the issue of the border with NI.

Peregrinus

It will nevertheless be a massive exercise in humble pie. "We threw all our toys out of the pram back in '16; can we please, please have some of them back?" There'll be no avoiding the reality that, if in five or ten years' time the UK is negotiating for readmission to the UK, or admission to the EEA, they'll be holding out the begging bowl to be able to deal with Europe in terms that they enjoyed as of right before Brexit. How can that be anything other than humiliating?

I think for that to happen you'd have to see not just a massive shift in public attitudes and perceptions, but also a significant political realignment and the eclipse of the generation now dominating on both sides of the politics in Westminster, so that the people piloting the UK back into the EU or into the EEA can dump all the blame on their predecessors, and not be seen to be disloyal, ungrateful or hypocritical for doing so.

In other words, this is not a long-term game than anyone now influential in UK politics is pursuing.

Peregrinus

Wicklow Will wrote: »

I think, given the UK is our largest single trading partner, Ireland should think of holding a Keave /Remain referendum too. We'd be better off aligning ourselves with the UK and with the USA and Canada as the next two most significant players where Rep Ireland is concerned we'd be better off. It would also address the issue of the border with NI.

How are things in the 1960s?

Here the 2000s, you'll be interested to hear, the EU-27 is a vastly, vastly bigger trading partner for us than the UK. The EU is at an advanced stage of negotiating trade deals with the US and Canada, while the UK has yet to begin, and nobody concerned to promote trade with the US and Canada thinks that leaving the EU and aligning ourselves with the UK is going to advance that process.

Nody

Peregrinus wrote: »

It will nevertheless be a massive exercise in humble pie. "We threw all our toys out of the pram back in '16; can we please, please have some of them back?" There'll be no avoiding the reality that, if in five or ten years' time the UK is negotiating for readmission to the UK, or admission to the EEA, they'll be holding out the begging bowl to be able to deal with Europe in terms that they enjoyed as of right before Brexit. How can that be anything other than humiliating?

By blaming it all on on the Conservative party and throwing the likes of Boris under the bus for it. See how ****ty deal we got? It's because of the Conservatives. See what pain they cause us? It's because of Boris and his ilk etc. So the government would be humiliated but deflect it into anger at previous party in power as the once in fault forcing this insult on the British people but they will show a stiff upper lip on behalf of UK and get the work done.

I think for that to happen you'd have to see not just a massive shift in public attitudes and perceptions, but also a significant political realignment and the eclipse of the generation now dominating on both sides of the politics in Westminster, so that the people piloting the UK back into the EU or into the EEA can dump all the blame on their predecessors, and not be seen to be disloyal, ungrateful or hypocritical for doing so.

Fully agree; and it very much depends on how badly (if it goes badly) after leaving EU, how many companies will hint at it's due to EU and how much they can regain back if joining EU again in terms of soft power (i.e. London, manufacturing investments etc.). That to me would be the trigger for something like that to happen.

In other words, this is not a long-term game than anyone now influential in UK politics is pursuing.

Well we've already seen cries about tearing up the idea to leave by some politicians which would be sowing the seeds for the idea. Then again being politicians they will throw quite a few seeds out there to see what grows up after all so I don't think there's a party today sitting around planning on how to rejoin EU. Rather I think it would come as a natural evolution based on things going bad so to speak and be used as a rallying cry to differentiate the party from the rest / usurp a leadership role in a party.

Peregrinus

Nody wrote: »

By blaming it all on on the Conservative party and throwing the likes of Boris under the bus for it. See how ****ty deal we got? It's because of the Conservatives. See what pain they cause us? It's because of Boris and his ilk etc. So the government would be humiliated but deflect it into anger at previous party in power as the once in fault forcing this insult on the British people but they will show a stiff upper lip on behalf of UK and get the work done.

No, it will take more than that. Because, even now, Labour is not opposing Brexit; they accept the outcome of the referendum and the mandate to implement it. So a future generation seeking to reverse this is going to have to dump on this entire generation of politicians, including in their own party. This is true no matter which party is in power when "Bre-enter" becomes an issue.

Jim2007

Wicklow Will wrote: »

I think, given the UK is our largest single trading partner, Ireland should think of holding a Keave /Remain referendum too. We'd be better off aligning ourselves with the UK and with the USA and Canada as the next two most significant players where Rep Ireland is concerned we'd be better off. It would also address the issue of the border with NI.

Really, you'd want to leave the EU because we export 14% of our exports to the UK and exporting 13% to the Benelux, with the EU being our biggest trading partner.
The UK has ran a negative balance to trade for over 20 years, while we have been running a massive positive balance for the same period. One of the contributing factors is the fact that we get trade in an undervalued currency at no cost to our exchequer. If we were to reintroduce the punt it would soar and the central bank does not the reserves to devalue it.
It would be economic suicide to leave the EU. Are you still reading 1970s newspapers when we exported 55% to the UK!!!!

BlitzKrieg

Bloomberg warning that it'll be the us and neither Europe or the uk that will benefit from a hard brexit in terms of London financial srvices:http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-10-16/the-big-winner-from-london-s-brexit-exodus-isn-t-even-in-europe

Thomas_...

As if it wasn t already enough to deal with all those Brexit effects that might or might not kick in, there's always an idiot who wants to get attention. This time, after Mr Johnson was questioned by the media for his pre-Brexit EU comments that were positive until he changed sides, another Tory likes to brand EU support in the UK as being "treason":

http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-37677973

djpbarry

amacca wrote: »

Whats to stop them having a second referendum after a period of hand wringing and soul searching if the right groundwork is laid?

Putting a question to the electorate more than once is, apparently, "undemocratic".

Sam Russell

djpbarry wrote: »

Putting a question to the electorate more than once is, apparently, "undemocratic".

Maybe, but it is not undemocratic if you get the wrong answer. Sure we do it all the time when the wrong answer is returned. (Divorce, Lisbon, etc.)