Brexit discussion thread II

Vronsky

hju6 wrote: »

Good news for the rest of Europe though

How unlucky, lost after drawing lots

solodeogloria

solodeogloria wrote: »

Good evening!



It's go whistle territory because there is no way that what the UK agreed to give will reach that figure. That's a lot of money that could be put to a lot of good within the UK. If the EU are serious about coming to a reasonable figure that covers what the UK has agreed to give for the budget schedule and other liabilities then we can discuss that. But £80bn / €100bn isn't a reasonable figure. That's quite similar to the war reparations that ambro25 discussed. The UK won't be "punished" or "made an example" of.



A deal with a €100bn "bill" is a rubbish deal. It would be better to walk.

I'm personally hoping for a reasonable, mutually beneficial arrangement. That wouldn't be it.

If Ireland's interested in a good arrangement then it should be arguing for one. Namely a mutually beneficial deal with good trade and customs terms.

Much thanks,
solodeogloria

Based upon?

Samaris

solodeogloria wrote: »

Good evening!



It's go whistle territory because there is no way that what the UK agreed to give will reach that figure. That's a lot of money that could be put to a lot of good within the UK. If the EU are serious about coming to a reasonable figure that covers what the UK has agreed to give for the budget schedule and other liabilities then we can discuss that. But £80bn / €100bn isn't a reasonable figure. That's quite similar to the war reparations that ambro25 discussed. The UK won't be "punished" or "made an example" of.



A deal with a €100bn "bill" is a rubbish deal. It would be better to walk.

I'm personally hoping for a reasonable, mutually beneficial arrangement. That wouldn't be it.

If Ireland's interested in a good arrangement then it should be arguing for one. Namely a mutually beneficial deal with good trade and customs terms.

Much thanks,
solodeogloria

The talk about being punished and the rest is childish, Solo. The UK government won't even agree on a metric by which to calculate it, they just chuck out wild figures and argue that they won't pay any more because the British people won't stand for it. That is ridiculous.

Ireland is in no good position if it gives up its only leverage of insisting the UK get its act together and come up with some solid, sound proposals for the border. If we bend over, we will get rogered, because the UK government knows very well that there are no good solutions and are either too cowardly or too incompetent to make more of a stab at it than airy-fairy "maybe we can do something techy to solve it". There will be no movement until the UK actually moves even to the starting line. We've been waiting months and the UK is still dithering in the dressing room. Ireland will protect itself. It's no business of ours to be protecting the UK at its own expense.

And a no-deal and refusal to honour commitments will be appalling for the UK. Because the UK then has to go to the WTO, where the other 27 countries that have just been shafted by the rather malicious incompetence of the United Kingdom have to agree to all of Britain's proposals - or not. Any single one of them (plus the unit of the EU which is also a member as a collective) can make life very, very difficult for Britain afterwards, and that is before all the other countries in the WTO have their say (and they will. They really, really will. The phrase "feeding frenzy" comes to mind, because the protectionism on certain products that has benefited the UK so far has only been won by the strength of the EU bloc behind them.)

The UK has been warned multiple times that it is not as easy as it seems to think it is. Walk. Pay nothing. The country that will ultimately be the worst damaged is Britain. But hey, the EU will suffer too in the form of Ireland, who gets second-worst screwed. I really don't see how this is a consolation, pissing off the nearest neighbour, plus the other 27 nearest neighbours, but apparently in the UK gutter press, it makes it all worthwhile.

Beechwoodspark

Good to see Barnier make it abundantly clear to the UK today that they are the ones who are required to propose a solution for the Irish border.

We need specific proposals not airy fairy talk of "imaginative", "creative" pipe dreams.

Calina

solodeogloria wrote: »

Good evening!

It's go whistle territory because there is no way that what the UK agreed to give will reach that figure. That's a lot of money that could be put to a lot of good within the UK. If the EU are serious about coming to a reasonable figure that covers what the UK has agreed to give for the budget schedule and other liabilities then we can discuss that. But £80bn / €100bn isn't a reasonable figure. That's quite similar to the war reparations that ambro25 discussed. The UK won't be "punished" or "made an example" of.

Okay.

There is a problem and it is this: the EU has provided a methodology for calculating Britain's liabilities on exit. We won't fight over the terminology one way or the other as that is a waste of time, but in general, there is a methodology. They have not actually put forward a figure although I believe the FT actually looked at the methodology and came up with a figure ball park 60 billion. I don't have the article to hand.

The UK has not responded in kind. Instead, responses like "we'll give you 20 billion" are bandied around, with no indication as to what they are based on, much, although the occasional person pops up with a multiple of the annual contribution which "seems" reasonable

If the UK is serious about moving on, they will stop bandying round figures around and start talking about the line items they are prepared to fund because they committed to them, or because they are pension fund contributions to cater for the staff who have worked on their behalf since 1973.

I go to an antiques fair every couple of weeks here, and sure, there's something I want, and we can haggle. This is not a 30 year old Parker pen to with round figures to be thrown around. There is a methodology to be agreed and that is part of the Article 50 negotiating period. It identifies what the UK has committed to and bases its outcome on that. It's not the throwing out of 20 billion, or 40 billion or whatever numbers you are using. I don't even care what they are. I care that they are not obviously based on an item by item assessment of what the UK has committed to pay for.

In short, the EU is interested in knowing what the UK is willing and prepared to pay for. It is not interested in figures. If the UK is interested in coming to a reasonable agreement, it will start talking about what it is willing to pay for.

You cannot say with any certainty what constitutes a reasonable figure until the items it covers have been enumerated. I'd argue that 100 billion may be well worth it, or may be excessive. It depends on the outcome of a job the UK has shown enormous unwillingness to do. So far.

solodeogloria wrote: »

A deal with a €100bn "bill" is a rubbish deal. It would be better to walk.

I'm personally hoping for a reasonable, mutually beneficial arrangement. That wouldn't be it.

If Ireland's interested in a good arrangement then it should be arguing for one. Namely a mutually beneficial deal with good trade and customs terms.

Much thanks,
solodeogloria

I really don't know if it would be better to walk. You're not going to get any sort of a free trade agreement out of Europe for a long time if the UK does that and it is likely that 100 billion would be cheap in the face of that. About 250 billion worth of exports go to the EU from the UK per year - this will vary on trading conditions and on currency fluctuations of course, but the question is, how long would it take to amortize the loss of - say - services trade against coming to an agreement for 100 billion.

This is a good question and it is difficult to answer. In 2015, the UK exported 123 billion pounds sterling worth of services to the UK and this figure does not include transport, banking and travel - source so I suspect it under reports some what.

London First estimated that exiting the EU and negotiating a reasonable MFN set of terms would result in the UK seeing its exports fall by between 67 billion and 92 billion a year. They estimate services exports on their own would fall by 17 billion and note that this is a conservative estimate. They also have some estimates on leaving with no favourable terms See page 17 here. Note that report was written in 2016 by the way. Based on those figures, it would be maybe 2 years before the cost of not paying 100 billion would be felt.

But to be honest, solo, I think it's unlikely the figure would reach 100 billion and I'd much prefer the UK to actually sit down and stop throwing around figures almost randomly and start identifying the things they promised to pay for that they aren't now going to welch on.

MPFGLB

IF there is a soft border between ROI and NI (which the DUP and Tories hard liners dont seem to want) the revised border will have to be in the Irish sea and patroled from UK ports and within airports but what stops Scotland asking for the same as NI

Ie a soft border between NI and Scotland to ensure free movement and same trade deal as NI

Surely Scotland with all their protestations would be calling for this ?
And then what would be the argument not to give it to them since they had a majority remain vote

So the previous map may need a dashed line between Scotland and England

hju6

Beechwoodspark wrote: »

Good to see Barnier make it abundantly clear to the UK today that they are the ones who are required to propose a solution for the Irish border.

We need specific proposals not airy fairy talk of "imaginative", "creative" pipe dreams.

Yes great to see some unelected European twit making sound bites, the UK has a right to leave the EU as has any other still sovereign state,
the border issue is not just a problem for the UK but a joint problem both for the EU and the UK,

it takes two to make a border.

Samaris

Calina wrote: »

But to be honest, solo, I think it's unlikely the figure would reach 100 billion and I'd much prefer the UK to actually sit down and stop throwing around figures almost randomly and start identifying the things they promised to pay for that they aren't now going to welch on.

Entirely agree with your post, and just to reiterate, as has been pointed out many many times before, including in your post - that is all the EU has currently asked the UK to do. Start clarifying their position rather than making up wild numbers and basing them on "what the British people will accept". It is really, really not an unreasonable ask!

MPFGLB

hju6 wrote: »

Yes great to see some unelected European twit making sound bites, the UK has a right to leave the EU as has any other still sovereign state,
the border issue is not just a problem for the UK but a joint problem both for the EU and the UK,

it takes two to make a border.

Of course the UK and anyone can leave anytime ....the UK wants a good trade deal with EU...that is the price they will have to pay ..but they can walk away anytime

The exit payment and the border are 2 differnt things and the border needs to be decided by UK as they are the ones who wanted to take back their borders..
Hard or Soft the EU probably dont care ...its what the Irish want that is the issue
ROI and most of NI want soft while DUP seem to want hard

How a hard border works is not an issue

Its what the UK mean when they say they back a soft border ? They must have an idea how it will work otherwise EU just has a hard border

hju6

MPFGLB wrote: »

Of course the UK and anyone can leave anytime ....the UK wants a good trade deal with EU...that is the price they will have to pay ..but they can walk away anytime

The exit payment and the border are 2 differnt things and the border needs to be decided by UK as they are the ones who wanted to take back their borders..
Hard or Soft the EU probably dont care ...its what the Irish want that is the issue
ROI and most of NI want soft while DUP seem to want hard

How a hard border works is not an issue

Its what the UK mean when they say they back a soft border ? They must have an idea how it will work otherwise EU just has a hard border

The border has existed long before the EU,

Leroy42

hju6 wrote: »

it takes two to make a border.

Totally incorrect.

It is the UK that is making this border, by their decision.

That they have little or no idea how to do it or what the impact it will have and have reverted to basically calling the EU meanies for not helping them out is staggering.

In terms of the costs, €60bn sounds a lot but it is relative. The UK keep saying its too much, but why? If they had signed up to $100bn of projects then 60bn is cheap and vice versa.

As Calina said, the UK seemed annoyed that they are being asked for anything. But every divorce costs money, that they seem surprised is the shock.

I have yet to see any justification for them not agreeing with the number, apart from they do't want to.

It is time for the UK to start having a grown up conversation about this. There are negatives to this which seem to be ignored. Whether these negatives are worth it over time does not negate the need to understand the impact.

For too long the UK seem to think they will get everything. Barnier was cleaver today. He turned the simple May line of "Brexit means Brexit" back at them. Yes it does, Brexit means you leave and you can't keep those bits you like and dump the rest.

hju6

Leroy42 wrote: »

Totally incorrect.

It is the UK that is making this border, by their decision.

That they have little or no idea how to do it or what the impact it will have and have reverted to basically calling the EU meanies for not helping them out is staggering.

In terms of the costs, €60bn sounds a lot but it is relative. The UK keep saying its too much, but why? If they had signed up to $100bn of projects then 60bn is cheap and vice versa.

As Calina said, the UK seemed annoyed that they are being asked for anything. But every divorce costs money, that they seem surprised is the shock.

I have yet to see any justification for them not agreeing with the number, apart from they do't want to.

It is time for the UK to start having a grown up conversation about this. There are negatives to this which seem to be ignored. Whether these negatives are worth it over time does not negate the need to understand the impact.

For too long the UK seem to think they will get everything. Barnier was cleaver today. He turned the simple May line of "Brexit means Brexit" back at them. Yes it does, Brexit means you leave and you can't keep those bits you like and dump the rest.

Anyhow all decisions are on hold now until glorious leader Merkel sorts out the German parliament,

Calina

hju6 wrote: »

Anyhow all decisions are on hold now until glorious leader Merkel sorts out the German parliament,

Really, they aren't.

flatty

I saw an email today from about as senior a UK banking lawyer as there is.
In summary, the brexit process is an absolute, and I mean absolute shambles, with an utterly clueless negotiating team on the British side who have not got an iota of what they have got themselves into. It was the most pessimistic report on the process I have yet read, and that is going some.
I honestly think, that if the UK persist with their current leadership and approach, it will be set back to the seventies.
There will be blood on the streets.

Beechwoodspark

hju6 wrote: »

Yes great to see some unelected European twit making sound bites, the UK has a right to leave the EU as has any other still sovereign state,
the border issue is not just a problem for the UK but a joint problem both for the EU and the UK,

it takes two to make a border.

I would respectfully suggest that the uk send their specific proposals to Dublin post haste so that dublin can analyse them.

Once both sides agree,then perhaps the uk can make some progress on phase 2 of the negotiations.

steddyeddy

hju6 wrote: »

Yes great to see some unelected European twit making sound bites, the UK has a right to leave the EU as has any other still sovereign state,
the border issue is not just a problem for the UK but a joint problem both for the EU and the UK,

it takes two to make a border.

Well the UK made the border originally under threat of war. Now They're endangering a peace deal proposed to deal with the problems partition caused in the first place. Sounds like it should be the UK's problem to me. If not it's only fair that the EU make it their problem.

hju6

flatty wrote: »

I saw an email today from about as senior a UK banking lawyer as there is.
In summary, the brexit process is an absolute, and I mean absolute shambles, with an utterly clueless negotiating team on the British side who have not got an iota of what they have got themselves into. It was the most pessimistic report on the process I have yet read, and that is going some.
I honestly think, that if the UK persist with their current leadership and approach, it will be set back to the seventies.
There will be blood on the streets.

I saw a vision of “Mary” today,

ambro25

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

Hmm... I saw a Trainee Patent Attorney opportunity at The Hague I almost went for. The Netherlands has a good history as a free-trading nation, almost as good as the UK's so it's an excellent choice. Fingers crossed Dublin gets the EBA headquarters. Be something of a consolation over the whole border fiasco.

The husband of a pretty vile Greek woman I used to work for worked for the EMA so I can finally point to some good coming from Brexit.

On the assumption that this is either private practice or industry and not an EPO job, The Hague is a great place to learn the ropes, ancapailldorcha

The EPO there (which I'm sure you'd visit very regularly pre-qual) is more 'chilled' than Munich, but just as busy and relevant (and possibly more so in some technical fields, e.g. they have a great telecoms/signals processing team there).

If there's still time, don't put it off: the profession is going to shrink severely in the UK, and I can see the numerus clausus striking for a few years in terms of UK final exams.

But if it's an EPO job: jump on it. Now. Yesterday. The training! the pay! the perks! (OMFG the perks!)

@ steddyeddy: nothing boring about it (solicitor types will tell you that, but really they're just jealous: they can't do the techy bit, so they can't do the job). Especially if you handle contentious stuff as well. I'd argue it's probably the least boring civil legal professional job there is: you never know what each day brings. As in: it could be the next Elon Musk walking through the door

flatty wrote: »

I saw an email today from about as senior a UK banking lawyer as there is.
In summary, the brexit process is an absolute, and I mean absolute shambles, with an utterly clueless negotiating team on the British side who have not got an iota of what they have got themselves into. It was the most pessimistic report on the process I have yet read, and that is going some.
I honestly think, that if the UK persist with their current leadership and approach, it will be set back to the seventies.
There will be blood on the streets.

Topically, on the subject of flatty's post. Yes, I can easily believe that. Can't be any different for your solicitor friend at the UK and EU financial law coalface, than it is for me at the UK and EU intellectual property coalface.

Brexit is a legal process first and foremost and, in legal terms -since we are trained, qualified, competent and experienced in it- the implications of just about every flavour of Brexit upon our respective areas of legal practice (including consequences for client affairs ruled by same) are easily and fully mappable, and have been since long before the referendum. Whence we have been warning and shouting from the rooftops about the oncoming iceberg, and continue to do so...but we might as well pee in a violin to try and get a tune out, because there's still only just static at the other end of the line.

I saw today that Nottingham University recently made a suggestion to have UK attorneys equivalenced as UK solicitors (the insult! the shame! ) so that they can enrol on the Roll of Solicitors in Ireland, with a view to maintain rights of access to the EU intellectual property office. Problem is, that doesn't work under current EU legislation, it would only get them right of access to practice before the Irish Patents Office (but not to enrol on the Irish registers). Now Nottingham University are second only to Queen Mary University in the IP educational stakes in the UK. But that's the scale of the problem. Right there. Even specialists who really should know better, are taking to wish on unicorns...

...unless that was Notts Uni demonstrating that it has already adopted the Brexit "snake oil merchant" economical model, and is just out to flog redundant unicorn courses at great expense :pac:

ancapailldorcha

hju6 wrote: »

I saw a vision of “Mary” today,

Don't spam this forum with nonsense please.

MPFGLB

hju6 wrote: »

The border has existed long before the EU,

I think like the Tories you dont seem to get it

There was a border thene there was not ..the past is not the issue

What there will be in the future is the issue and how it works given what Ni, ROI and the UK government say they want....this is what needs to be decided
and by the UK who have say ovr NI and say they want a soft border

Water John

So, I'm selling a car and ask €10K for it. The buyer disagrees and I then say I'll accept €5K. That's just what May has done.

MPFGLB

flatty wrote: »

I saw an email today from about as senior a UK banking lawyer as there is.
In summary, the brexit process is an absolute, and I mean absolute shambles, with an utterly clueless negotiating team on the British side who have not got an iota of what they have got themselves into. It was the most pessimistic report on the process I have yet read, and that is going some.
I honestly think, that if the UK persist with their current leadership and approach, it will be set back to the seventies.
There will be blood on the streets.

Well that will be fine for Jeremy Corbyn

he wil be PM and he is still living in the 70s (as are all his policies)

flatty

Indeed. I think a fair few middle of the road types are hoping for a ge, even with the knowledge that Corbyn will get in as
1 Itll put keir starmer in charge of the brexit negotiations
And 2 jeremynomics will likely last three or four years tops, and most of his major targets will ensnare him in legal action (eg renationalising British rail) to the extent that he might not get a great deal done.
He will up the top tax rate to 60%, which may well, conversely, reduce the tax intake, and will aim to put vat on school fees, which will wipe out a lot of the scholarship places they are able to offer.
Out of the eu, he won't be able to borrow much, and may well have to try and balance the books. God knows how he will, as capital takes flight. Hard left wing is not, and will not for the foreseeable future be a natural fit for UK politics, which is really a left leaning pro business type fit, like some of the councils.

steddyeddy

I'm watching Newsnight and a segment on the EMA and EBA leaving. One head of the a pharma company said that there could be delays of up to one year for new medicines and a lot of pharm companies could leave.

It's worth noting that David Davis last year stated that negotiations could see both the EMA and EBA stay in the UK. For the first time I'm worried about my future in the UK.

Akrasia

steddyeddy wrote: »

I'm watching Newsnight and a segment on the EMA and EBA leaving. One head of the a pharma company said that there could be delays of up to one year for new medicines and a lot of pharm companies could leave.

It's worth noting that David Davis last year stated that negotiations could see both the EMA and EBA stay in the UK. For the first time I'm worried about my future in the UK.

For the first time?

It's been clear since the day after the referendum that the Brexiteers had absolutely no plan for how to successfully leave the EU without also destroying the UK economy.

The best argument they have these days is 'yeah the economy will be hit in the short term, but where will we be in 10 - 20 years time?'

This is even more worrying, because they are convinced that they have greatness within them, so they're going to blame everyone who gets in their way and refuse to accept responsibility for their own decision.

When the negotiations collapse, they'll declare that the EU unreasonableness is the reason they left in the first place

When the economy stalls, they'll declare that it's because of unfair punishment by the EU who are trying to sabotage them to prove a point

When the economy fails to recover, these same brexiters will be blaming the EU for economic blockades against them

The good thing, (hopefully) is that the main brexiters will be shoved off the stage by the British public as soon as the sh1t starts hitting the fan, and their whinging will be from the political wilderness while sensible, educated people are left picking up after them and returning to the EU looking to be let back in.

I would like to think that the EU will allow them back in without too much of a fuss, the cost will be the loss of all the special exemptions that europe allowed them in the past, but with the brexiters rhetoric barking in the background, there will be a lot of ruffled feathers in Europe who won't be endeared to the British by the time it comes to that.

MPFGLB

steddyeddy wrote: »

I'm watching Newsnight and a segment on the EMA and EBA leaving. One head of the a pharma company said that there could be delays of up to one year for new medicines and a lot of pharm companies could leave.

It's worth noting that David Davis last year stated that negotiations could see both the EMA and EBA stay in the UK. For the first time I'm worried about my future in the UK.

I am worried

Issues like the level of UK borrowing , the deficit, the overall debt, the balance of payment, the reliance in food imports, the value of the pound, the fact the UK imports about 1.5 times what it exports, the impending loss of city jobs..and the lack of confidence

Not to mention who i going to pick the strawberries for Wimbledon

I was on business course 2 weeks ago and it was full of bankers who were talking of heading out of the Uk and people from Paris over to do courses in preperation for bank moving there ...gave me pause for thought

FrancieBrady

I see the British Times has a headline tomorrow Brexiteers call on May to exploit Merkel crisis'

How would she do that?

*sorry about blue emoticon, can't get rid of it

steddyeddy

MPFGLB wrote: »

I am worried

Issues like the level of UK borrowing , the deficit, the overall debt, the balance of payment, the reliance in food imports, the value of the pound, the fact the UK imports about 1.5 times what it exports, the impending loss of city jobs..and the lack of confidence

Not to mention who i going to pick the strawberries for Wimbledon

I was on business course 2 weeks ago and it was full of bankers who were talking of heading out of the Uk and people from Paris over to do courses in preperation for bank moving there ...gave me pause for thought

Well I'm based in both Colorado and Southampton in the UK as part of an American dept of energy project. However our lab has lost 200k (2 x PhDs) due to loss of EU funding. I see myself leaving here for America soon.

steddyeddy

FrancieBrady wrote: »

I see the British Times has a headline tomorrow Brexiteers call on May to exploit Merkel crisis'

How would she do that?

They can't really. It's not just Germany but also France and the other EU27 they have to deal with. The fact that Brexiters have called for this shows their stupidity.

ancapailldorcha

ambro25 wrote: »

On the assumption that this is either private practice or industry and not an EPO job, The Hague is a great place to learn the ropes, ancapailldorcha

The EPO there (which I'm sure you'd visit very regularly pre-qual) is more 'chilled' than Munich, but just as busy and relevant (and possibly more so in some technical fields, e.g. they have a great telecoms/signals processing team there).

If there's still time, don't put it off: the profession is going to shrink severely in the UK, and I can see the numerus clausus striking for a few years in terms of UK final exams.

But if it's an EPO job: jump on it. Now. Yesterday. The training! the pay! the perks! (OMFG the perks!)

Ah this was a while ago. They seem to want polyglots which rules me out. Thanks though. I've switched jobs already this year so a bit of stability is something I'm after. Moving to the continent and mangling another language might not be such a great idea.

Anyway, the Financial Times have produced this rather interesting infographic:

Vronsky

steddyeddy wrote: »

They can't really. It's not just Germany but also France and the other EU27 they have to deal with. The fact that Brexiters have called for this shows their stupidity.

Well they can. The UK could become even more difficult and with the distraction of a German election they could see it as an opportunity for a preoccupied Germany to agree to anything.

It's a flawed strategy though because it assumes a state acts in the same way as a person. A state has the resources to keep an adequate eye on everything through a civil service which protects the long term interests of the state. The only way a crisis for a state presents an opportunity for another is if one has something it needs. Unfortunately for the UK, it isn't offering Germany anything to break the political dead lock there.

Just because Merkel is busy fighting an election doesn't mean the German government is abandoning it's posts.

Capt'n Midnight

FrancieBrady wrote: »

I see the British Times has a headline tomorrow Brexiteers call on May to exploit Merkel crisis'

How would she do that?

*sorry about blue emoticon, can't get rid of it

Germany is an immediate problem where a change in government could cause all sorts of effects.

UK is going through the motions , unless there is a sea change it's hard Brexit, like it's been since day one and besides it's all being dealt with by a united EU team.


I know which one world leaders will be loosing sleep over this week.



If Merkel gets replaced can anyone see the UK getting an improved deal ?

Capt'n Midnight

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

Ah this was a while ago. They seem to want polyglots which rules me out. Thanks though. I've switched jobs already this year so a bit of stability is something I'm after. Moving to the continent and mangling another language might not be such a great idea.

Anyway, the Financial Times have produced this rather interesting infographic:

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DO0vSh0XUAAvBny.jpg

They can't really blame the EU for the slide in sterling.

And weren't they already told the bill is in Euro ?

BlitzKrieg

The noise over Germany from some corners of the media is quite funny. Its not like there's a part of the UK that has been unable to form a government for ten months in a territory that is a crucial red line in the Brexit negotiations...

oh wait.

flaneur

It's hilarious given the UK's government is currently teetering on the brink and is only in power because it's supported by a far right, ultra nationalist, religious fundamentalist party from an obscure region that’s prone to extreme violence about national identity politics and that is profoundly impacted by Brexit.

Yet Merkel apparently has the problem? Lol

The word “deluded” springs to mind.

Peregrinus

Capt'n Midnight wrote: »

They can't really blame the EU for the slide in sterling.

And weren't they already told the bill is in Euro ?

SFAIK it's not a question of "blame".

The EU budget, and the contributions to it, are indeed denominated in euros. The
percentage share of the total that each country is expected to pay is based on a complicated formula which I don't pretend to understand; that formula (when last calculated) yields a 13% share for the UK.

But one factor in the formula is; how wealthy is each country? What's its GDP? And this is of course again measured in euros for every country. And the UK's GCP, measured in euros, has of course declined with the decline of the pound against the euro. The UK is in fact poorer (relative to Euroland, which includes most of the rest of the Union) and therefore is arguing that it should bear a lesser share of the EU budget - 12.5% rather than 13%.

I don't know how often the national budget shares are recalculated, or when the next recalculation is due, or whether the UK is, in effect, pressing for an additional unscheduled recalculation. So no doubt there's plenty of room for argument about whether the budget shares should be recalculated as the UK wants.

The telling (and politically embarrassing) point, though, is that when you cut through the detail the UK is arguing that its proportionate contribution should be reduced in recognition of the fact that, as a result of the Brexit decision, it has impoverished itself.

Peregrinus

FrancieBrady wrote: »

I see the British Times has a headline tomorrow Brexiteers call on May to exploit Merkel crisis'

How would she do that?

*sorry about blue emoticon, can't get rid of it

I haven't see the Times story but, yeah, how is Merkel's problem supposed to help the Brexiteers' cause? It's not as if parties in Germany other than Merkel's have been calling for the UK to be given a deal more to the Brexiteers' taste.

Brexit is not a huge deal in Germany. If the Brits want to go, they can go, is the general attitude. Germany's interest in the matter is confined to ensuring so far as possible that Brexit is not conducted on terms which threaten the integrity and cohesion of the Single Market (ex. UK, obviously). This isn't a matter of division between government and opposition, which is why Brexit barely featured as an issue in the last election and won't feature in another election, if there is one, and it isn't an issue on which there is much difference between the political establishment on the one hand, and the commercial/industrial establishment on the other. Business would rather that the 7.5% of exports that go to the UK were not too badly affected, but to avoid this they will not do anything which might jeopardise the remaining 92.5% of their exports, so maintaining the cohesion and coherence of the Single Market is pretty much a non-negotiable item on all sides in Germany. It's not just the Brits who can lay down red lines.

I can't see that any of this is likely to change as a result of the present parliamentary impasse in Germany. Nor is a fresh election likely to make any difference.

stefanovich

The UK needs to stop pandering to the EU demands. They should be going straight for a hard exit, pay them nothing. May is looking increasingly weak. They need someone with a Thatcher sized set of balls on them leading the country.

Peregrinus

stefanovich wrote: »

The UK needs to stop pandering to the EU demands. They should be going straight for a hard exit. . .

That's pretty much what they have been doing all along, to be honest.

stefanovich wrote: »

May is looking increasingly weak.

It's precisely because May is weak that she has to veer towards a hard Brexit. She lacks the intestinal fortitude to stand up to loony Eurosceptic wing of her own party in the way Thatcher did, and in any event her parliamentary position is so precarious that she dare not target any outcome that she risks being unable to deliver. The harder the Brexit, the easier it is to deliver, since the less co-operation/concessions are needed from the EU.

stefanovich wrote: »

They need someone with a Thatcher sized set of balls on them leading the country.

That would be no balls at all, surely?

solodeogloria

Good morning!

BlitzKrieg wrote: »

The noise over Germany from some corners of the media is quite funny. Its not like there's a part of the UK that has been unable to form a government for ten months in a territory that is a crucial red line in the Brexit negotiations...

oh wait.

There's a difference between a federal government not being able to meet and a national government not being able to be formed.

The DUP need to give way over the Irish Language Act (relatively inexpensive) and Sinn Féin need to compromise and get back to governing Northern Ireland instead of grandstanding. Good politics is based on pragmatism rather than idealism.

Germany is rather more serious. This isn't just that the federal government in Sachsen-Anhalt or Baden-Württemberg aren't meeting (closest example) but that a national government can't be formed.

flaneur wrote: »

It's hilarious given the UK's government is currently teetering on the brink and is only in power because it's supported by a far right, ultra nationalist, religious fundamentalist party from an obscure region that’s prone to extreme violence about national identity politics and that is profoundly impacted by Brexit.

Yet Merkel apparently has the problem? Lol

The word “deluded” springs to mind.

There's a narrative that the UK Government is less stable than the German Government. This isn't true. At least a Government in the UK was able to be formed. The Conservatives are not massively below the magic number to govern on their own.

Whereas it took most of the year to form a government in the Netherlands and in Germany we're seeing how difficult this process is. (By the by a Calvinist political party are in coalition in the Netherlands. I personally don't think there's anything wrong with having a Christian party in coalition but if you're going to criticise that be consistent).

There's nothing "delusional" about pointing this out as a big problem and as an impediment to Brexit in particular. It shows that the EU propaganda of stating that May is weak is just nonsense. She's no weaker than the Germans. (The Tories got 43% in the election which is the highest they've received in a long time, the CDU only got 32%)

Much thanks,
solodeogloria

Enzokk

stefanovich wrote: »

The UK needs to stop pandering to the EU demands. They should be going straight for a hard exit, pay them nothing. May is looking increasingly weak. They need someone with a Thatcher sized set of balls on them leading the country.

Pay the EU nothing? Not even the money that they said they would pay? The EU isn't asking for payment, they are asking the UK to pay what they have committed to.

listermint

solodeogloria wrote: »

Good morning!



There's a difference between a federal government not being able to meet and a national government not being able to be formed.

The DUP need to give way over the Irish Language Act (relatively inexpensive) and Sinn Féin need to compromise and get back to governing Northern Ireland instead of grandstanding. Good politics is based on pragmatism rather than idealism.

Germany is rather more serious. This isn't just that the federal government in Sachsen-Anhalt or Baden-Württemberg aren't meeting (closest example) but that a national government can't be formed.



There's a narrative that the UK Government is less stable than the German Government. This isn't true. At least a Government in the UK was able to be formed. The Conservatives are not massively below the magic number to govern on their own.

Whereas it took most of the year to form a government in the Netherlands and in Germany we're seeing how difficult this process is. (By the by a Calvinist political party are in coalition in the Netherlands. I personally don't think there's anything wrong with having a Christian party in coalition but if you're going to criticise that be consistent).

There's nothing "delusional" about pointing this out as a big problem and as an impediment to Brexit in particular. It shows that the EU propaganda of stating that May is weak is just nonsense. She's no weaker than the Germans. (The Tories got 43% in the election which is the highest they've received in a long time, the CDU only got 32%)

Much thanks,
solodeogloria

If you are arguing that may is not weak you've failed on multiple levels.

She is weak we know she is weak but no one wants to step in.

Peregrinus

The German and UK political systems are sufficiently different that not being able to assemble a parliamentary majority plays out quite differently in each country. It's a much more serious problem in the UK than in Germany (and many similar European systems). Merkel has problems, but any assumption that they are similar to the problems May would have in an analogous situation in the UK is mistaken.

One of the differences is that Merkel can let this situation ride for much longer than would be feasible in the UK. The notion that this will help the UK in the Brexit discussions does not sit well with this. If anything, it is likely to work the other way; Germany may enter a period of political stasis in which it continues to be governed by the current lot, but significant policy initiatives or changes do not happen at all, or happen very slowly. Hence Germany's stance with respect to the EU brief for the Brexit talks is not likely to change for many weeks or months. Merkel will still be the Chancellor of Germany at the December 14 summit, and it is now very unlikely that her stance on the Brexit talks will be any different from what it has been all along. If somebody is going to move to avoid or break a logjam, that somebody will not be Germany.

solodeogloria

stefanovich wrote: »

The UK needs to stop pandering to the EU demands. They should be going straight for a hard exit, pay them nothing. May is looking increasingly weak. They need someone with a Thatcher sized set of balls on them leading the country.

Good morning!

On the money it'll be interesting from hearing from the Chancellor. The monthly borrowing figures are out this morning too. In September we saw a record low due to an increase in tax receipts. It'll be interesting to see what comes in October.

Tomorrow's budget will probably be the precursor to what exactly was agreed by the cabinet yesterday. I think the figure being bandied around in the papers is about right. Potentially using assets to increase that is possible but the €60bn+ or even €100bn won't be agreed to by the UK and rightfully so. It'd be an utter waste of taxpayers money that could be much better spent on domestic priorities.

listermint: the truth is that she's no weaker than Merkel is right now. The figures I've pointed to by vote share show this. May is much closer to the magic number in parliament. Maybe Merkel can go ask Schulz to change his mind but I doubt he will.

Edit: Peregrinus - I said it would be an impediment for Brexit.

Much thanks,
solodeogloria

flaneur

UK and also US media commentators regularly don’t understand proportional representation systems at all and assume they work exactly like their own systems. I saw a lot of alarmist nonsense around the Dutch elections.

Also I don’t think they understand the dynamics of the French two round system. Or, at least, they don’t want understand it as it’s more dramatic to talk about impending CRISIS!!!

mickoneill31

stefanovich wrote: »

The UK needs to stop pandering to the EU demands. They should be going straight for a hard exit, pay them nothing.

The UK contributes £8.6billion a year to the EU budget.
Would it be worth the damage they'd do to their economy and to ours to go for the hard brexit? It's estimated that a hard brexit would cost the UK up to £400bn by 2030.

A hard brexit would hugely affect us too but some of that £400bn would probably come our way. We're already getting some benefit (and disadvantages) from brexit as it stands.

Peregrinus

solodeogloria wrote: »

Edit: Peregrinus - I said it would be an impediment for Brexit.

Well, in one sense, an impediment, since it removes one possible avenue out of the current impasse, which is a shift of position on the EU side led by the Germans. That was never as likely as some in the UK fondly believed, but it is now even less so.

In another sense, it simplifies and clarifies, since the permutations and combinations of how this might play out are now reduced.

But, as regards the relative weakness of May and Merkel, I don't think Merkel's 33% versus May's 43% means what you think it means. The German political sysem has never (since 1945) favoured simple majoritarianism. All German governments are coalitions, and the leading party in a German coalition government typically has well below 40% of the vote; this hasn't prevented Germany from having a series of strong, stable governments. A successful politician isn't the one who secures a majority in the elections; it's the one who has the political skills to assemble a secure and functional coalition after the elections.

A German party which secured 43% in a general election would be regarded as having won in a landslide; nobody has secured that in at least the last 35 years. As the present circumstances show, that clearly isn't what you get from a 43% vote in the UK.

Zubeneschamali

solodeogloria wrote: »

There's nothing "delusional" about pointing this out as a big problem and as an impediment to Brexit in particular.

This is not an impediment to Brexit - A50 has been triggered and Brexit is happening in March 2019. The UK is not negotiating terms with the German Federal Government, they are negotiating with the EU.

solodeogloria

Good morning!

Peregrinus: I don't know why you're explaining the difference in electoral systems to me. I'm fully aware of this.

My simple point is that May isn't "weaker" than Merkel particularly at this juncture and that's true. If Merkel can't form a government (irrespective of electoral system) that is much worse than having a slight minority with a confidence and supply arrangement to get legislation through. Irrespective of outcome it isn't wrong to point to vote share to say that May was in a stronger position on the numbers.

Much thanks,
solodeogloria

flaneur

From an Irish perspective, we should have more of a sense of the German system works than the British and Americans do, as it’s not as far removed from the system we use as Westminster or Washington first past the post is.

Ireland’s actually probably the longest established user of PR voting in the world. Certainly, one of the the longest continuous and stable PR democracies in existence.

So we should have a fair understanding of the horse trading and coalition forming that Merkel is doing. Her position is far more like a Taoiseach in a coalition than a typical British PM.

It’s also far less about tabloid headlines, shouting and heckling the other parties across the floor.