Brexit: The Last Stand (No name calling)

R P McMurphy

Junkyard Tom wrote: »

Will Britain not just clone that law in its great repeal copy-pastie bill?

I would imagine that the name could be used inside other EU countries once brexit goes ahead.

Junkyard Tom

R P McMurphy wrote: »

I would imagine that the name could be used inside other EU countries once brexit goes ahead.

So we could make and sell Cornish Pasties to our English tourists?

Christy42

BBDBB wrote: »

Yes. And by the same token the actual amounts involved are important, given the massive sums involved, to ignore that and obscure it is simply disingenuous in order to support a political agenda

The U.K. Will not make that sacrifice, if you think they will, then you may have a point. But I can assure you, you have seriously misunderstood the uk position and attitude. Everyone here is saying how the uk has made its bed and now they are going to pay the price. Do you seriously think that all the EU need to do is go to each of the 27 and ask what's on their Christmas list? What to you want the GB to bring you this year? And then when that's all done the uk will cough up to enter the single market and still be a good, cooperative neighbour

The art of any negotiations not telling the other side what you want, it's not about being in the position to hurt the other side more or less than they hurt you, it's not about squeezing the last drop out of them, it's about keeping both sides around the table, keeping the dialogue going or else what's the point of having negotiations at all? Just send a letter back, Thanks, sorry you are going, here's your wine bill, here's how much it's going to cost you to trade going forward and here is our list of demands not to invade you because we are bigger than you

Getting 27 individuals to agree a strategy is problematic, to think otherwise is naive. They all have a veto, Ie the power to put the brakes on, do you really believe that 26 will allow 1 to scupper progress, create uncertainty and delay a productive future? I don't. The bigger picture is too valuable to all, for that to be permitted.

Even in total amounts the UK has the most to lose out of any individual country here.

No not every country will get what they want out of this but the final result will end up a lot closer to the EU's wish list than the UK's. To begin with the single market is off the table. I don't even think Spain will get what it wants entirely. It will however pretty much define the terms of the agreement (aside from the UK still technically owning the place I would guess). Aside from being able to say they technically own it I don't see the UK fighting hard over it when it is an easy thing to let slide to get Spain a bit nicer at the negotiating table.

The EU has yet to stop the UK from creating uncertainty and delay a productive future.

Zubeneschamali

Christy42 wrote: »

No not every country will get what they want out of this but the final result will end up a lot closer to the EU's wish list than the UK's.

Once upon a time, we had to pretend that the substance mattered, but nope. not any more. The anti-EU brexit numbnuts have shown their colours - facts do not matter, just winning.

Let them all rot.

Grayson

Junkyard Tom wrote: »

So we could make and sell Cornish Pasties to our English tourists?

Scotch whiskey maybe?

snowflaker

Grayson wrote: »

Scotch whisky maybe?

fyp

BBDBB

Christy42 wrote: »

Even in total amounts the UK has the most to lose out of any individual country here.

No not every country will get what they want out of this but the final result will end up a lot closer to the EU's wish list than the UK's. To begin with the single market is off the table. I don't even think Spain will get what it wants entirely. It will however pretty much define the terms of the agreement (aside from the UK still technically owning the place I would guess). Aside from being able to say they technically own it I don't see the UK fighting hard over it when it is an easy thing to let slide to get Spain a bit nicer at the negotiating table.

The EU has yet to stop the UK from creating uncertainty and delay a productive future.

How much in euros will the EU lose ? If it's tuppence then yeah you
have a point, if it's billions of euros then I'm right, the sum of money is too big to simply shrug and allow the deal to not be made, that's the point I was making. The argument that the uk will suffer more because the Euro is bigger is true but it was never an argument I was advocating

Right, so whilst the 27 nations will indeed have their own priorities, they won't all be realised and therefore they won't be permitted by their EU colleagues to block the whole thing over something meaningful to only them. They will be allowed to stamp their feet but eventually the EU will have to present a united front in the extent and parameters of their requirements. I happen to think that the uk stance over Gibraltar will be an absolute no, I don't see them budging on it, clearly others think otherwise, fair enough. But if I'm right, Spain will eventually be brought into line by the EU to allow progress to be made, that's why, to answer the original question, the Eu will blink first on this one.

I'm fairly sure the uk wants the uncertainty to disappear every bit as much, possibly more so, given what's at stake

Grayson

snowflaker wrote: »

fyp

Doh!


Although Scotland may not need to worry about that.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/apr/02/spain-drops-plan-to-impose-veto-if-scotland-tries-to-join-eu

Spain has said it would not veto an attempt by an independent Scotland to join the EU, in the clearest sign yet that Brexit has softened Madrid’s longstanding opposition.

Alfonso Dastis, the Spanish foreign minister, made it clear that the government would not block an independent Scotland’s EU hopes, although he stressed that Madrid would not welcome the disintegration of the UK. He also said Edinburgh would have to apply for membership, a process fraught with uncertainty that is likely to take several years.

Asked directly whether Spain would veto an independent Scotland joining the EU, Dastis said: “No, we wouldn’t.”

That's removed the biggest obstacle to an independent Scotland entering the EU. Sure, there's still an ascension process but there was no way they'd join if a member vetoed them.

snowflaker

https://twitter.com/ComedyCentralUK/status/847859783801737217

Grayson

Grayson wrote: »

Doh!


Although Scotland may not need to worry about that.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/apr/02/spain-drops-plan-to-impose-veto-if-scotland-tries-to-join-eu




That's removed the biggest obstacle to an independent Scotland entering the EU. Sure, there's still an ascension process but there was no way they'd join if a member vetoed them.

Looks like they have finally decided that they cannot be seen to be an obstacle to an independent Scotland re-joining the EU, assuming Brexit happens first.
Presumably, the issue of Catalan breaking away and remaining in the EU will be treated as an internal affair.

Grayson

Deleted User wrote: »

Looks like they have finally decided that they cannot be seen to be an obstacle to an independent Scotland re-joining the EU, assuming Brexit happens first.
Presumably, the issue of Catalan breaking away and remaining in the EU will be treated as an internal affair.

It might be a ploy. They could suddenly change their mind if the UK gives up gibralter.

FrancieBrady

Grayson wrote: »

It might be a ploy. They could suddenly change their mind if the UK gives up gibralter.

Spain 2 UK 0

The UK looks like falling apart after Spain score again at the start of the second half.

Grayson

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Spain 2 UK 0

The UK looks like falling apart after Spain score again at the start of the second half.

Second half? We're still in the first minute.

To be fair, one team has 27 players and the other has 1.

FrancieBrady

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Spain 2 UK 0

The UK looks like falling apart after Spain score again at the start of the second half.

How do you chalk that up to a win for Spain?
Gibraltar & Scotland are two different issues.

FrancieBrady

Deleted User wrote: »

How do you chalk that up to a win for Spain?
Gibraltar & Scotland are two different issues.

Well it is either unconnected to the Gibraltar issue or they are making a play here - do a deal on Gibraltar and we will help save the UK by changing our minds on Scotland's application.

Even if that is politically cynical of me, they have dealt a final blow to all those who have been trumpeting Spain as a possible impediment to Scotland being independent. (and the claim has been made many times here)

The video ref has had a look, 2 good goals by Spain!

Alan_P

Deleted User wrote: »

How do you chalk that up to a win for Spain?
Gibraltar & Scotland are two different issues.

You do know that the French invented diplomacy, don't you ? Assuming you do, how might Gibraltar and Scotland be connected ? Given that the Spanish got a totally unexpected and fairly radical clause into the A50 response, what might they have offered in exchange ?

Christy42

BBDBB wrote: »

How much in euros will the EU lose ? If it's tuppence then yeah you
have a point, if it's billions of euros then I'm right, the sum of money is too big to simply shrug and allow the deal to not be made, that's the point I was making. The argument that the uk will suffer more because the Euro is bigger is true but it was never an argument I was advocating

Right, so whilst the 27 nations will indeed have their own priorities, they won't all be realised and therefore they won't be permitted by their EU colleagues to block the whole thing over something meaningful to only them. They will be allowed to stamp their feet but eventually the EU will have to present a united front in the extent and parameters of their requirements. I happen to think that the uk stance over Gibraltar will be an absolute no, I don't see them budging on it, clearly others think otherwise, fair enough. But if I'm right, Spain will eventually be brought into line by the EU to allow progress to be made, that's why, to answer the original question, the Eu will blink first on this one.

I'm fairly sure the uk wants the uncertainty to disappear every bit as much, possibly more so, given what's at stake

If the eu does not blink. Do you truly believe that the UK will walk away from a deal because Gibraltar is getting a slightly worse deal?

The UK has caused all the uncertainty. They may take the blame for any uncertainty after the 2 year period. Not Spain.

BBDBB

Christy42 wrote: »

If the eu does not blink. Do you truly believe that the UK will walk away from a deal because Gibraltar is getting a slightly worse deal?

The UK has caused all the uncertainty. They may take the blame for any uncertainty after the 2 year period. Not Spain.

I think the EU would need to concede an awful lot more than they would like in order to get the UK to even discuss it, let alone throw Gibraltar under the bus. I think the EU know that, that's why it's a useful opening pawn to play.What I truly believe is that I dont even think it will come up again as an issue until later in the process, if or when it does, it will cause a few headlines before the bigger goals will swamp it.

That's a very simplistic version of it but yes if you think that the triggering of article 50 is the cause of the uncertainty, yes the uk is to blame. Personally I don't see it that simply, I certainly haven't said that Spain is to blame so I'm not sure what you are saying here. To clarify, everyone wants the uncertainty to disappear that's why pragmatism will win out

Capt'n Midnight

Christy42 wrote: »

I don't even think Spain will get what it wants entirely. It will however pretty much define the terms of the agreement (aside from the UK still technically owning the place I would guess). Aside from being able to say they technically own it I don't see the UK fighting hard over it when it is an easy thing to let slide to get Spain a bit nicer at the negotiating table.

The EU has yet to stop the UK from creating uncertainty and delay a productive future.

For Spain this is win-win. Unless there is a deal Gibraltar will be outside the EU and dependent on the UK for handouts. So the UK will have to be nice to Santander and Zara and Travel and Immigration. from Spain.


Gibraltar is a fuel stop. So it's reliant on foreign registered ships. EU health and safety rules may affect future flag of convenience ships importing into the EU - look at the US history on that - and that could have a knock on effect.

Capt'n Midnight

BBDBB wrote: »

if it's billions of euros then I'm right, the sum of money is too big to simply shrug

The Common Agricultural Policy has a budget of €59Bn a year. It currently provides over half of UK farm income.

To dumb it right down , there are two sets of talks.
Brexit, which is about the billions the UK owes , and other niceties.

Trade deal, based on how much the UK has paid and the Freedoms offered to EU citizens a new deal or transition deal would be worked out.

I'm fairly sure the uk wants the uncertainty to disappear every bit as much, possibly more so, given what's at stake

The UK has done nothing to reduce uncertainty about anything except "we're leaving" until the last minute.

May had a full year to get a final stay in deal, with as many concessions as possible. What has she done to stop non-EU immigration since the vote ? How much did non-EU immigration drop by in her previous job ?
Did May explain to the UK voters what leaving the EU will mean ? Did the UK try to protect the interests of EU/UK people living in the UK/EU ?

BBDBB

Capt'n Midnight wrote: »

The Common Agricultural Policy has a budget of €59Bn a year. It currently provides over half of UK farm income.

To dumb it right down , there are two sets of talks.
Brexit, which is about the billions the UK owes , and other niceties.

Trade deal, based on how much the UK has paid and the Freedoms offered to EU citizens a new deal or transition deal would be worked out.




The UK has done nothing to reduce uncertainty about anything except "we're leaving" until the last minute.

May had a full year to get a final stay in deal, with as many concessions as possible. What has she done to stop non-EU immigration since the vote ? How much did non-EU immigration drop by in her previous job ?
Did May explain to the UK voters what leaving the EU will mean ? Did the UK try to protect the interests of EU/UK people living in the UK/EU ?

Exactly. It's not peanuts is it, so all the bollocks about walking away is foolish, regardless of the sentiment "well at least the other side is hurting too/more."There is too much at stake to walk away, there's too much at stake to be dealing hammer blows to each other. This is a negotiation, not a versaille treaty for the 21st century. The aim surely has to be about the way the future looks for the whole of Europe, in and out of the EU. As I said a while ago, what we will see in the next two years is essentially a conjuring trick, keeping things as close to how they are now in practical terms whilst appearing to be different. The headings and titles will change but the money will still flow in the same directions and into the same pockets

have a heart Capt, I'm trying to exit this debate, not field more feckin questions!

Not much
I think it went up didn't it? I'd have to check
I think it's valid to say that both campaigns could have done a much better job in explaining the consequences, that said I'm not sure how much it would have altered the vote

I think it's fairly clear, even this early on, that a mutual protection of eu/uk citizens is a high priority on both sides and as such a mutual agreement will be fairly quickly agreed once it's on the table for discussion

steddyeddy

Senior conservatives are suggesting that Gibraltar could be the next Falklands and May could go to war over it........ Jesus Britain leave behind this imperialistic crap. Micheal Fallon, defense secretary also said Britain wpuld "go all the way in defense of Gibraltar".

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brexit-gibraltar-falklands-war-senior-conservatives-fallon-howard-a7662656.html

A Dub in Glasgo

Deleted User wrote: »

Looks like they have finally decided that they cannot be seen to be an obstacle to an independent Scotland re-joining the EU, assuming Brexit happens first.
Presumably, the issue of Catalan breaking away and remaining in the EU will be treated as an internal affair.

Spain have just reiterated what they have been saying for a while now. It was unionists and the media who peddled this veto nonsense

wes

steddyeddy wrote: »

Senior conservatives are suggesting that Gibraltar could be the next Falklands and May could go to war over it........ Jesus Britain leave behind this imperialistic crap. Micheal Fallon, defense secretary also said Britain wpuld "go all the way in defense of Gibraltar".

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brexit-gibraltar-falklands-war-senior-conservatives-fallon-howard-a7662656.html

The people who called this project fear, when Cameron suggested Brexit could lead to European wars, have been proven wrong in less than a week after article 50 was triggered.

Turns out that project fear was project reality after all.

FrancieBrady

steddyeddy wrote: »

Senior conservatives are suggesting that Gibraltar could be the next Falklands and May could go to war over it........ Jesus Britain leave behind this imperialistic crap. Micheal Fallon, defense secretary also said Britain wpuld "go all the way in defense of Gibraltar".

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brexit-gibraltar-falklands-war-senior-conservatives-fallon-howard-a7662656.html

Fupping terrorists! :pac:

steddyeddy

wes wrote: »

The people who called this project fear, when Cameron suggested Brexit could lead to European wars, have been proven wrong in less than a week after article 50 was triggered.

Turns out that project fear was project reality after all.

We have the defense secretary and a senior tory threatening war a few days into negotiations. People wonder why brexiters are accused of being imperialistic. Another reason why the EU needs an army.

FrancieBrady

steddyeddy wrote: »

We have the defense secretary and a senior tory threatening war a few days into negotiations. People wonder why brexiters are accused of being imperialistic. Another reason why the EU needs an army.

Not a mission they will 'go to war' over Gibraltar. May doesn't need the PR to get elected. If Corbyn comes up in the polls and looks like winning maybe they will. :rolleyes:

steddyeddy

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Fupping terrorists! :pac:

Far more dangerous than most. All that was mentioned is a trade deal veto, not invasion.

IRE60

In London at the weekend - in Borough Market they have a wall where you, in chalk, can finish the sentence 'befofe​ I did I want to' - just thought I'd share!

Fleawuss

Britain plays defense and europol card. EU plays Gibraltar card and end of Spanish veto on Scotland entering EU thus enabling disintegration of U.K. Brits go ballistic seeking to red line Gibraltar from process. Sky tv still quotes Brexiteers that defense etc card caused panic in European capitals.

I wonder how those of a nervous disposition will cope with the coming shocks in the negotiations. Other cards: Brit ex pats in EU and property; the Chunnel; customs checks; visas for Brits to enter EU; air transport; finance finance finance. This is beyond the usual Irish political cliche of senior hurling. This is geo politics and economics on a scale not seen since the end of WW2 in Europe. For the sake of a future for everyone I hope the EU has the balls to seek the defeat of the Brexiteers.

Falcon L

I was speaking to a guy in the UK last week. He has property in Spain and is in the process of applying for an Irish (European) passport, like so many others over there.

steddyeddy

The Telegraph just printed a lovely article stating that Britain's navy isn't up to Falklands standards but "it could still cripple Spain". This from a paper who described Martin McGuinness as a warmonger.

https://www.google.co.uk/amp/www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/04/02/britains-navy-far-weaker-falklands-could-still-cripple-spain/amp/

Falcon L

steddyeddy wrote: »

The Telegraph just printed a lovely article stating that Britain's navy isn't up to Falklands standards but "it could still cripple Spain". This from a paper who described Martin McGuinness as a warmonger.

https://www.google.co.uk/amp/www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/04/02/britains-navy-far-weaker-falklands-could-still-cripple-spain/amp/

That's like saying "I'll kick your ass". All very well if you got the ass on it's own. Spain is part of a union that the UK is leaving. Could they cripple the whole union? I very much doubt it. :cool:

catbear

It's like they have to be baby stepped to their true position.

As was said once in the 1970s, the UK was once a great power but now it still a great nation but if it ever tries to be a great power again it will cease to be both.

It reminds me of the auld sheepdog gone mad.

Enzokk

So if the UK goes to war against Spain due to Gibraltar, would they need to come to defense of Spain against themselves due to their NATO obligation?

steddyeddy

Enzokk wrote: »

So if the UK goes to war against Spain due to Gibraltar, would they need to come to defense of Spain against themselves due to their NATO obligation?

It's worth remembering Spain issued no threats. They potentially have a veto over any deal. Just like the rest of the 27.

Enzokk

steddyeddy wrote: »

It's worth remembering Spian issued no threats. They potentially have a veto over any deal. Just like the rest of the 27.

I have seen the UK threaten the EU that they will not co-operate with security if they don't get the deal they want and now threaten a war over Gibraltar. This is no way to start what will be a long negotiation for both parties. If the UK have to press the go to war button so early on you really have to worry for them as this is basically the nuclear button options on day 5 of a 2 year process.

Kermit.de.frog

I remember the last time British troops stormed a Spanish beach - by accident! They ran away...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s3pzOShrZSo

catbear

Enzokk wrote: »

So if the UK goes to war against Spain due to Gibraltar, would they need to come to defense of Spain against themselves due to their NATO obligation?

I read once that llyods had to pay out policies to German fright owners who lost their ships to British attacks during WWI!

BoatMad

steddyeddy wrote: »

The Telegraph just printed a lovely article stating that Britain's navy isn't up to Falklands standards but "it could still cripple Spain". This from a paper who described Martin McGuinness as a warmonger.

https://www.google.co.uk/amp/www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/04/02/britains-navy-far-weaker-falklands-could-still-cripple-spain/amp/

you d really have to be stunned by whats passing as news in the UK.

Billy86

Falcon L wrote: »

That's like saying "I'll kick your ass". All very well if you got the ass on it's own. Spain is part of a union that the UK is leaving. Could they cripple the whole union? I very much doubt it. :cool:

Come to think of it, in a roundabout way starting a war with Spain is probably the most efficient way for the UK to rejoin the EU, though whether it would do so under the name Reino Unido, Royaume-Uni or Großbritannien would remain to be seen.

catbear

I always thought that european unity would be solidified by an external force but it seems the UKs departure is doing the job.

Since the cromwellian conquest Irelands access to the world has been suppressed by Britain, what Britain now discards is ours for the taking.

Capt'n Midnight

steddyeddy wrote: »

The Telegraph just printed a lovely article stating that Britain's navy isn't up to Falklands standards but "it could still cripple Spain". This from a paper who described Martin McGuinness as a warmonger.

What exactly would the Royal Navy do ?

If it's not a shooting war then it'll probably play out like the Cod War which the UK lost. If it's a shooting war then how long would the Royal Navy last without air cover ?

A reminder the ship that won the Falklands war , HMS Hermes, retired recently, after spending 30 years serving the Indian Navy. In fact had that war started a few months later the UK would not have been able to do anything as HMS Invincible had been sold to Australia and Hermes was due to be decommissioned, also the Vulcans didn't have many hours left on .their airframes.

NIMAN

Jez, this Brexit has taken a bad turn, we're talking about war with Europe now!

catbear

Capt'n Midnight wrote: »

A reminder the ship that won the Falklands war , HMS Hermes, retired recently, after spending 30 years serving the Indian Navy.

Actually what won the war was a single long range bombing mission that if it had failed to hit the airport the argentinian ground forces would have had the back up they needed to repel the Brits.

steddyeddy

The Sun going with the threatening angle again. Less than a few weeks after they were criticising McGuinness.

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/3235404/britain-gibraltar-spain-war-brexit/

Thargor

catbear wrote: »

Actually what won the war was a single long range bombing mission that if it had failed to hit the airport the argentinian ground forces would have had the back up they needed to repel the Brits.

Brilliant story, brilliant book:

https://www.amazon.co.uk/d/Books/Vulcan-607-Rowland-White/0552152293

RDM_83 again

Capt'n Midnight wrote: »

What exactly would the Royal Navy do ?

If it's not a shooting war then it'll probably play out like the Cod War which the UK lost. If it's a shooting war then how long would the Royal Navy last without air cover ?

A reminder the ship that won the Falklands war , HMS Hermes, retired recently, after spending 30 years serving the Indian Navy. In fact had that war started a few months later the UK would not have been able to do anything as HMS Invincible had been sold to Australia and Hermes was due to be decommissioned, also the Vulcans didn't have many hours left on .their airframes.

I'm not sure how many subs they have operational at the minute but the Royal Navy boats can carry Tomohawks and have been used to stand long offshore and launch cruise missiles.

The UK's forces are probably not that capable of operating particularly effectively without American support but they shouldn't be dismissed just because its fashionable to sh-t on everything British because of Brexit, they have a budget nearly 4 times that of Spain for example

FrancieBrady

RDM_83 again wrote: »

I'm not sure how many subs they have operational at the minute but the Royal Navy boats can carry Tomohawks and have been used to stand long offshore and launch cruise missiles.

The UK's forces are probably not that capable of operating particularly effectively without American support but they shouldn't be dismissed just because its fashionable to sh-t on everything British because of Brexit, they have a budget nearly 4 times that of Spain for example

America wouldn't let them leave Portsmouth.
The Brexit thing has just got surreal.

RDM_83 again

FrancieBrady wrote: »

America wouldn't let them leave Portsmouth.
The Brexit thing has just got surreal.

Its in the best traditions of crazy arm chair general hypothetical situations , on that note though if Trump lasts why wouldn't he be on board with bombing a bunch of people who're like basically Mexicans

I do think a lot of the harder line put forward in some of the EU figures statements will reduce considerably though.

For example the whole intelligence sharing thing is a bargaining chip, many of the european countries simply can't carry out the sort of work GCHQ does without being pulled in front of their courts.
Its deeply cynical to put this forward but it could be a win win for the UK, if the EU is inflexible about a quid quo pro for British intelligence data they reduce sharing, more attacks in europe, increased successful terrorism attacks on the mainland = increased euro-skepticism.

I genuinely don't think the UK's negotiation position is as bad as many put forward the EU puts forward unified messages but there is a lot of division. Poland, Hungary and the Czech Republic are all on potential collision courses with the EU at the minute and if the coming summers refugee wave leads to more high handedness from Germany there will be even more pressures