Brexit discussion thread III

First Up

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

Water John wrote: »

She wants financial services agreement. She thinks this is a pressure, trump card, pointing out how EU companies have borrowings from London banks.
Her failure is the basic premise that the UK and EU are and will be about equal.

I keep thinking of a child writing to Santa. Dunno why.

Not far off. As the saying goes, an objective without a plan is simply a wish.

J Mysterio

This is an absolute car crash.

LuckyLloyd

I eagerly look forward to the Brexit press spinning this as a strong display of great leadership

Water John

Ann Soubry rips it apart on BBC 2. She says they fail to understand that the EU see it as a political issue not an economic issue.
So what the PM is putting forward has no traction with the EU.

BonnieSituation

Hard ass question from the French journalist.

BonnieSituation

Water John wrote: »

Ann Soubry rips it apart on BBC 2. She says they fail to understand that the EU see it as a political issue not an economic issue.
So what the PM is putting forward has no traction with the EU.

Stupidly watched it on Sky News. Eugh.

ancapailldorcha

Lemming wrote: »

"We are all still Europeans".

Would this be a good time to remember the phrase coined by the same woman: "Citizens of nowhere"?

I'm starting to regret my defence of her above.

Water John

This is how the European journalists view it.


14:37
Q: [From a French journalist] Isn’t it time you told the truth, that there will be a border in Northern Ireland? Maybe a light border, but there will be a border.

May says she has been very clear; there will be no return to a hard border in Northern Ireland.

And she will maintain the common market of the UK, she says.

Facebook Twitter Google plus
7m ago
14:36
Q: [From a German journalist] Is Brexit worth it in the light of what you are saying today?

May says, if that was a question about whether the UK will think again, it won’t. She says the people took the decision. It is up to parliament to implement it, she says.

Unlike some politicians, she is being straight with people, she say


My opinion:She wants to stay almost identical to the EU present position. But the EU won't buy that nonsense

BlitzKrieg

embraer170 wrote: »

It seems everything TM wants should reflect "the UK's unique starting point".

Has it really not hit them that their desire to leave the EU and dissolve the existing relationship gives them a weak starting point? It's like someone in a relationship walking out but still wanting to come home for some home cooked food, to snuggle up in bed, and get their clothes washed.

has it not hit them that the UK isnt really all that unique overall. The UK's economy and resources are jack of all trades there is no unique strong point the UK has that cannot be matched by another EU member state.

Sam Russell

BlitzKrieg wrote: »

has it not hit them that the UK isnt really all that unique overall. The UK's economy and resources are jack of all trades there is no unique strong point the UK has that cannot be matched by another EU member state.

Well, they have a large motor assembly industry, so that is unique. Well, it would be if it was not owned by the Germans, Japanese, Indians, French, Americans.

Ok, not so unique after all. Would those foreign owners move their assembly plants out of the UK? They wouldn't would they? Not even if they were hit with non-tariff barriers and tariffs? Would they move even if the British workers upped their productivity to European norms?

We shall see.

trellheim

Text of TM's speech

https://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2018/03/theresa-mays-our-future-partnership-speech-in-full/

J Mysterio

"A few more cherries on the Brexit cake"
- Guy Verhofstadt

Leroy42

TBF, she did go into a lot more detail than in any previous speech, and certainly proved more clarity than any of the other ministers.

However, my view on it is that it basically is saying that they want to keep all the good things about the EU, without any of the responsibilities. Of course that is understandable, everyone wants that, but the EU has already said that is not available.

One area that summed it up for me is the area of digital single market, with the line that the UK is a world leader. So, basically, we want everything that you have, and give you nothing that we do!

ON the area of regulations, she kept saying that they are starting out aligned and that Britain would maintain those standards, But what if the EU changes the standards? UK seems to be suggesting that some independent body would judge? Why would the EU give away control like that?

She also seemed to suggest that in large areas they will take back control by agreeing to EU laws and regulations. That they want tariff free and open borders, that they want to be able to bring in tariff free goods for the whole world and sell them on to Europe.

So an the one hand, they at least have acknowledged that there are significant areas of concern, that Brexit is not the 'easiest trade deal in history' and that in all likelihood Brexit will results in reduce access to SM. But on the other hand they still fail to acknowledge that the EU has to look after its own viability and cannot simply allow a direct competitor to have all the goodies without any responsibilities

trellheim

If you notice (read the speech I linked to ) we are back to a technology solution on the NI border

Which sounds like she has been channelling Boris

BlitzKrieg

I think what a lot of the UK seems to be missing is anything the UK pushes that requires the EU to change its own rules to accomadate the UK.

I think Guy Verhofstadt summed it up best here: https://twitter.com/adamfleming/status/969594627727790081?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.theguardian.com%2Fpolitics%2Fblog%2Flive%2F2018%2Fmar%2F02%2Fmay-brexit-speech-theresa-may-to-use-her-brexit-speech-to-say-we-cant-have-everything-grayling-says-politics-live

but from an irish perspective it is much more simple.

If the EU started changing it's rules to accommodate the UK it would need the EU to go through its own legislation process to create a new amendment treaty which will eventually lead to a referendum here.

But the UK is not thinking of this and is insisting on pushing the EU to fub its rules for the UK and the EU is pushing back that it can only fub things as far as they've allowed fubbing in other treaties, any further will require a new treaty.

Which will not make things easier for the UK.

Vronsky

BlitzKrieg wrote: »

I think what a lot of the UK seems to be missing is anything the UK pushes that requires the EU to change its own rules to accomadate the UK.

I think Guy Verhofstadt summed it up best here: https://twitter.com/adamfleming/status/969594627727790081?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.theguardian.com%2Fpolitics%2Fblog%2Flive%2F2018%2Fmar%2F02%2Fmay-brexit-speech-theresa-may-to-use-her-brexit-speech-to-say-we-cant-have-everything-grayling-says-politics-live

but from an irish perspective it is much more simple.

If the EU started changing it's rules to accommodate the UK it would need the EU to go through its own legislation process to create a new amendment treaty which will eventually lead to a referendum here.

But the UK is not thinking of this and is insisting on pushing the EU to fub its rules for the UK and the EU is pushing back that it can only fub things as far as they've allowed fubbing in other treaties, any further will require a new treaty.

Which will not make things easier for the UK.

A referendum in Ireland is only required when there is a transfer of powers.

briany

I got about 10 minutes into the speech and then started getting the feeling I used to get when listening to a mass reading of Paul's Epistle to the Romans. Phrases and words delivered in a calm tone of voice which sound vaguely agreeable, but aren't significantly revelatory and which lull you into bored, dreamy state.

BlitzKrieg

Vronsky wrote: »

A referendum in Ireland is only required when there is a transfer of powers.

One of the aspects of the treaties that will need to be re-adjusted to give the compromise the UK is looking for will be border related to allow the NI border to remain open. That can easily be argued as a transfer of power, the treaties dont work in specifics, they use the amendments to be specific about a country, so it may be a fub for the northern ireland border, but whatever fub it is could be in theory applied to other similar borders (and probably will need to be for Gibralter) so that will be directly a transfer of power and require a vote.

murphaph

I doubt Ireland will need to veto anything. The UK is winding the whole EU up at this stage. Parliament needs to find its courage or we are definitely heading for cliff edge Brexit IMO. The EU has nothing to work with here.

BlitzKrieg

On a side note, you'll see a lot of brexit people sharing claims of a report the EU did on how a technology border can work.

this is the actual report: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/STUD/2017/596828/IPOL_STU(2017)596828_EN.pdf

look at section 6.3.3 (requirements)


and the very first requirement:

A bilateral EU-UK agreement regulating advanced customs cooperation avoiding
duplication and with possibility to carry out tasks on each other's behalf;

Inquitus

BlitzKrieg wrote: »

On a side note, you'll see a lot of brexit people sharing claims of a report the EU did on how a technology border can work.

this is the actual report: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/STUD/2017/596828/IPOL_STU(2017)596828_EN.pdf

look at section 6.3.3 (requirements)


and the very first requirement:

Assume this can only work if standards remain aligned between the EU and the UK, otherwise there would be nothing to stop chlorinated chicken et al flooding the EU market. Ergo based on May and Co's current position its a non starter......

BlitzKrieg

Inquitus wrote: »

Assume this can only work if standards remain aligned between the EU and the UK, otherwise there would be nothing to stop chlorinated chicken et al flooding the EU market. Ergo based on May and Co's current position its a non starter......

The key is the no duplication requirement. That sinks May's suggestion of the UK just keeping aligned with Ireland, it's asking for a common customs policy.

We are talking something closer to Schengen which the UK is extremely opposed to having.

Water John

She has set out a stall, yes, but it's an approach already ruled out, because it has to, by the EU.
And that's the trouble. They don't get, or want to point out to their own people, that the EU cannot give them anything like they are wishing for.
So, we will either have along period of backsliding, accompanied by wailing, at every turn, by the UK, or the door slamming.

Capt'n Midnight

Anyone want to buy a bridge ?

Politicians ready to discuss bridge between NI and Scotland

Would anyone on either side be tempted to remain if the EU was going to fund this ?

LuckyLloyd

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

I eagerly look forward to the Brexit press spinning this as a strong display of great leadership

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2018/03/02/theresa-mays-best-brexit-speech-yet-pundits-give-verdict/

:rolleyes:

This was Theresa May’s best speech on Europe: substantive and reasonable. The pitch is a pro-European Brexit, combining the maximum of Brexiting with the minimum of disruption. Once out, we will mimic European regulations, which we would want to do anyway, she says, because they fit with Britain’s liberal-minded politics.

What’s the point of leaving then? Well, we will regain control over things like immigration and our budget contributions, plus we restore parliamentary sovereignty. If a future parliament wants to liberalise the employment laws or reintroduce massive state aid, it can – at the cost of a damaged relationship with Europe. But that, she could have sighed, will be an issue for Jeremy Corbyn or Jacob Rees-Mogg to decide. She’ll be in retirement in Devon.

Of course, what sounds utterly reasonable and pragmatic to us Brits might sound dangerously like common sense to the Commission, which obsesses about structures and rules. Perhaps the PM is daring them to reject it? If things do go pear-shaped, be in no doubt that the European bureaucrats are to blame. Theresa May has just offered them the moon on a stick and they’d have to be mad to refuse it.

I can't. I just can't. Three similarly positive takes contained within the article.

Water John

So the UK is inline with the EU in all things, until one day, something crops up and it diverges on an issue from the EU. What the f**k happens then?

flatty

First Up wrote: »

Leroy42 wrote: »

flatty wrote: »

"wasting time trying to keep a friend that hates us."

This is one sided, inflammatory, and untrue. I have loads of English friends, many of whom have been genuinely upset that we might be leaving because of brexit. The vote may be one of ignorance, but despite, as many have said, a drip feed of 40 years of of anti eu rhetoric followed latterly by a tsunami of lies, with the fast majority of the oligarchy that is the print media spinning against the eu 24/7, seventeen million people voted to remain.

Respect democracy! That's is the line. The country voted and decided to leave the EU, and since then have basically cast the EU as evil.

I'm not saying that everyone of them hates the EU, but overall, the majority do.

But yes, I accept that it is a bit OTT, I was trying to get the point across that they want out and no amount of explaining that things might be better if they stay will change that.

Nobody, especially "the EU" is expending any energy on trying to get them to stay. The EU Commission, with the unanimous support of the member states, is a divorce court, not a marriage counsellor.

I should clarify that when I say "we might be leaving", I'm talking about us as a family. We have viewed houses and schools, and have appointed a London firm to sound out a sale of the business.

CelticRambler

I listened with every intention of giving TM the benefit of the doubt.

The benefit didn't last long. When she acknowledged the difficulties that Britain will undoubtedly face, I thought she was setting us all up for a magnificent Brexit climb-down ... and then it was back to telling us that she's not cherry-picking because they're not cherries, they're glacé cherries, and it's not a cake she's looking for, but un gateau.

Britain ready to pay for associate membership of all the major European Agencies, in the vague/vain hope that the full members will listen? Surely that's a red rag to the Brexiteer bulls?

How on earth does she think she'll get any kind of a trade agreement that allows for "no quotas and no tariffs" ??? There's no point in citing examples of how Canada and Korea and Norway and Turkey can do a bit of this and a bit of that when they're well down the Barnier ladder and a long way removed from the "most comprehensive" bespoke deal that she says she wants.

And as for the Irish Border ... dear, oh dear ...

steddyeddy

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2018/03/02/theresa-mays-best-brexit-speech-yet-pundits-give-verdict/

:rolleyes:



I can't. I just can't. Three similarly positive takes contained within the article.

How in the name of feck can that be described as pro-Europe. It isn't pro-Europe, it's pro a vision of Europe that only Brexiters possess. One that sees the EU beg the UK for trade.

flatty

I'd add that "the country" has certainly not painted the eu as evil. A small coterie in Parliament have been allowed to do so by a weak and venal prime minister.
The print media represent their owners, of which there are three or four. The "journalists" working for them do what they are told.

Water John

Flatty, sorry to hear that. That's how such things are in reality already affecting, many people. Bull***t from Farge, Johnson, Gove and Mogg and the people swallowed it.

Leroy42

flatty wrote: »

I'd add that "the country" has certainly not painted the eu as evil. A small coterie in Parliament have been allowed to do so by a weak and venal prime minister.
The print media represent their owners, of which there are three or four. The "journalists" working for them do what they are told.

Unfortunately it is through the media and parliament that the country is represented.

In as much as the English football hooligans don't represent the majority of the UK, it is still the view that is considered when thinking about staging football matches.

If they don't like the media or the parliament, then people need to demand change. Based on the polls (50% odd still would vote Brexit) I think that it does represent the country

murphaph

Water John wrote: »

So the UK is inline with the EU in all things, until one day, something crops up and it diverges on an issue from the EU. What the f**k happens then?

It's why the EU won't and can't countenance it. UK heading for hard Brexit IMO. The general public is still completely divided.

CrabRevolution

I'm wondering how the Brexiteers envisage their ideal arrangement of the UK and the EU each having their own standards but just sort of ignoring the differences and winging it.

So far they're making vague assurances of standards staying the same "in spirit", which apparently removes the need for customs checks and will allow the UK to export to the EU despite only adhering to their own standards.

Say for example the EU somehow agrees to this, that UK standards are ok for import to the EU. Then the UK decides one day in 2021 (to use our perennial example) "from midnight tonight chlorinated chicken is allowed by UK standards".

This will instantly fail EU standards. But the EU has agreed to allow imports that meet British standards. Are the EU obliged to accept it? Can the UK argue that it's illegal to block them from exporting chicken to the EU since the EU agreed to recognise british standards?

If it went to court what laws would the court refer to since the UK refuse to be subject to the ECJ?

I know the UK has suggested an "independent commission" but what legislation would the commission rule with since the UK is exempt form EU laws? Their gut feeling?

Say the commission somehow sides with the UK and allows chlorinated chicken to be exported to the EU, does this mean this new commission (of which the UK are set to comprise a third of the membership) is the highest authority in the EU and can overrule the EUs own laws?

Nate--IRL--

Yeah that's the gist. The Cakeism doctrine.

Nate

BonnieSituation

Water John wrote: »

So the UK is inline with the EU in all things, until one day, something crops up and it diverges on an issue from the EU. What the f**k happens then?

Then we trust them. As equals, etc.

joeysoap

When did it change from the GFA to the Belfast agreement ?

Econ_

BlitzKrieg wrote: »

On a side note, you'll see a lot of brexit people sharing claims of a report the EU did on how a technology border can work.

this is the actual report: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/STUD/2017/596828/IPOL_STU(2017)596828_EN.pdf

look at section 6.3.3 (requirements)


and the very first requirement:

Aside from all of the legitimate questions as to whether technological solutions can actually prevent a hard border - very few seem to be mentioning the fact that even if it was possible, an IT project on that scale would take several years and probably cost billions to implement.

Cloud cuckoo land.

BonnieSituation

joeysoap wrote: »

When did it change from the GFA to the Belfast agreement ?

It's always been the Belfast Agreement. The GFA is what it was popularly known as, given the day on which it was signed.

Jim2007

BlitzKrieg wrote: »

One of the aspects of the treaties that will need to be re-adjusted to give the compromise the UK is looking for will be border related to allow the NI border to remain open.

The EU already operate such agreements so nothing new there. For example on the Swiss/German border you have both - Swiss towns within the EU customs union and German towns that are outside it.

Water John

Ian Dunt puts it excellently:
https://twitter.com/IanDunt/status/969616141948719104/photo/1?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.theguardian.com%2Fpolitics%2Fblog%2Flive%2F2018%2Fmar%2F02%2Fmay-brexit-speech-theresa-may-to-use-her-brexit-speech-to-say-we-cant-have-everything-grayling-says-politics-live

Enzokk

I can sort of see what the UK wants to achieve, but I cannot see how it is possible to do it. I can see something like having different but similar customs arrangement working, at least from a perspective where the illusion is given that a country will have its own regulations (even when they don't).

But for me it all falls down when it comes to trade deals with other countries. I can still see the like of JRM and BJ going along with the "alignment" as they would probably see it as an means to an end to get the trade deal, but I cannot see them accepting not being able to do trade deals with those goldmines of third countries that are just out there that the EU has missed.

So it seems to me that while her speech was a little less cake, there was still a lot of it that they wanted to have and eat.

Vronsky

BonnieSituation wrote: »

It's always been the Belfast Agreement. The GFA is what it was popularly known as, given the day on which it was signed.

Its actually both. Nationalists refer to it as the Good Friday Agreement, while Unionists refer to it as the Belfast Agreement.

Its just another one of those things that normal/sane people cant understand about the workings of politics in NI.

Leonard Hofstadter

Vronsky wrote: »

Its actually both. Nationalists refer to it as the Good Friday Agreement, while Unionists refer to it as the Belfast Agreement.

Its just another one of those things that normal/sane people cant understand about the workings of politics in NI.

The ironic thing is it's regularly referred to as the 'Good Friday Agreement' in the 'mainland', as the various mutterings from UK politicians over the past few days has shown.

First Up

BonnieSituation wrote: »

Water John wrote: »

So the UK is inline with the EU in all things, until one day, something crops up and it diverges on an issue from the EU. What the f**k happens then?

Then we trust them. As equals, etc.

The Brexiteers dream of an arrangement of "mutual recognition" in which anything that meets the UK's standards should be good enough for us foreigners. In return they will be gracious enough to accept (or tolerate) what the EU offers. All in the spirit of flexibility.

It assumes that the UK knows best and really shouldn't be questioned. Completely barmy of course but its what passes for reality in some quarters.

CelticRambler

Water John wrote: »

So the UK is inline with the EU in all things, until one day, something crops up and it diverges on an issue from the EU. What the f**k happens then?

Don't be silly, dear boy, Theresa said that she wants an agreement that will stand for all time and never have to be re-visited in the future, so no f**ks need be given. :rolleyes:







Except, maybe, by the UK, when they want to negotiate membership of the EU in 2031 ... :pac:

Econ_

Econ_ wrote: »

‘‘The EU produces papers and drafts.

The UK produces newspaper articles and speeches.’’


Brilliant summary of the entire Brexit process delivered by a FT correspondent.

Good article picking up on this point here.

The legal blogger and close Brexit-watcher David Allen Green notes that UK ministers, including May, keep making speeches or writing articles “setting out their vision” while Brussels issues formal, semi-legal documents packed with detail. That will happen again next week, when the EU publishes guidelines for the future trading relationship. The EU’s emphasis on process over publicity gives the EU27 an advantage: their texts become the starting point from which the UK has to diverge or, more often, to which it eventually concedes.

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/mar/02/theresa-may-brexit-mess?CMP=share_btn_tw

Water John

Listening to TM on the news again tonight. She probably achieved what she wanted and what she's ever wanted, a bit more time.
That's her only achievement.

joeysoap

captainspeed wrote: »

The ironic thing is it's regularly referred to as the 'Good Friday Agreement' in the 'mainland', as the various mutterings from UK politicians over the past few days has shown.

Noticed twice in the past week , including TM today, that it’s being called the Belfast agreemen. Shadow secretary for NI called it GFA on question time.

Blowfish

joeysoap wrote: »

Noticed twice in the past week , including TM today, that it’s being called the Belfast agreemen. Shadow secretary for NI called it GFA on question time.

TM has to refer to it as the Belfast Agreement as she's in bed with the DUP and they'll have a fit if she starts calling it the GFA.