Brexit discussion thread III

J Mysterio

Thats my experience also - they are just not taught anything about Ireland whatsover in school. I agree too that most English people have a warm view on Ireland.

I remember studying abroad years ago with a lovely English girl from Manchester who had no idea about:
* English colonisation of and plantations in Ireland,
* the Famine,
* War(s) of independence and,
* Northern Ireland.

It was pretty eye opening. She was reasonably bright but just had no idea about our shared history and was shocked when I started explaining about these things - a kind of mixture of being shamed and insulted/ offended.

LeinsterDub

J Mysterio wrote: »

Thats my experience also - they are just not taught anything about Ireland whatsover in school. I agree too that most English people have a warm view on Ireland.

I remember studying abroad years ago with a lovely English girl from Manchester who had no idea about:
* English colonisation of and plantations in Ireland,
* the Famine,
* War(s) of independence and,
* Northern Ireland.

It was pretty eye opening. She was reasonably bright but just had no idea about our shared history and was shocked when I started explaining about these things - a kind of mixture of being shamed and insulted/ offended.

Decent pod on this topic https://www.stitcher.com/podcast/the-irish-passport/e/52031338

ArmaniJeanss

They've fought in about 9 major international conflicts (off the top of my head) and been involved in many important events on the world stage, so I think it's understandable enough that the relative sideshow of incidents with Ireland don't make it onto their history curriculum.

Would need to see the actual curriculum though to see how inward looking it is but I doubt it can be that bad really. I don't think you can blame them for not regarding as important the same things that we do.

Skedaddle

That's the weird bit. It's not a relative side-show for the UK. It's a major part of modern British history, as relevant to them as the US Civil War is to the Americans. Considering that the UK still includes and partially consists of Northern Ireland, which has been a live conflict zone that has even caused considerable numbers of explosions in English cities, you would think that understanding Irish history and present-day events would be a very fundamental thing for your average student of history or politics in England.

It's side show to someone sitting in Chicago, Auckland, Beijing or Paris but if you're English, Irish history and present Northern Irish problems are part of your own history and present day politics.

The DUP is actually directly involved in the British Government. So, Irish history and modern politics is directly involved in the UK government and in every step they take in Brexit too as the Northern Irish border turned out to be the biggest stumbling block.

This is why I just find it absolutely bizarre that they have so little knowledge of Irish history or what the background to the Northern Ireland conflict actually is.

It would have been hugely useful to know this before turning up to Brussels and being shocked to discover that they actually have an EU land border and not only that but it's probably one of the most controversial borders in the EU.

It's psychologically disowning something that you were fundamentally involved in. I think it is a lot more traumatic to the British establishment psyche than they even fully understand themselves.

Water John

Ireland was, not a colony, like USA etc. It was, at the time, an integral part of the UK, MPs at Westminister etc. So 1921 Treaty was a seismic event, to a country seeing itself, as an Empire. It lost part of itself.
That may be a good reason why it's little mentioned in UK history.
We also, did not mention the civil war in the classroom. It would have been, very raw. Children from neighbouring families that took different sides would be sitting next to each other.

Zubeneschamali

Peregrinus wrote: »

So it may be that the UK negotiators are perfectly aware that the deal has to be done by October, but it suits them to pretend to think that they have till January.

Is Davis supposed to be in on it along with his delegation? Because that seems highly unlikely. Or is May playing a lone game, relying on Davis and the Brexiteers to be complete idiots?

Given the numbers of people involved, I think this cunning "Plamás the Brexiteers and then surrender to the EU at the last minute" policy would have leaked by now.

I think they are just incompetent and in over their heads.

Seth Brundle

Just on the lack of Irish knowledge...
http://www.radiotimes.com/news/2018-03-08/viewers-were-shocked-by-victorias-brutally-honest-depiction-of-the-potato-famine/
https://www.irishcentral.com/culture/entertainment/famine-episode-victoria

Professor Moriarty

Water John wrote: »

Ireland was, not a colony, like USA etc. It was, at the time, an integral part of the UK, MPs at Westminister etc. So 1921 Treaty was a seismic event, to a country seeing itself, as an Empire. It lost part of itself.
That may be a good reason why it's little mentioned in UK history.
We also, did not mention the civil war in the classroom. It would have been, very raw. Children from neighbouring families that took different sides would be sitting next to each other.

Children from parents whose siblings took different sides would be sitting next to each other.

Skedaddle

There's a consensus emerging now that the October deadline will be missed and the deal won't be ready until 2019.

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-03-08/no-brexit-deal-until-next-year-u-k-officials-say-privately

In that case, it's very likely to be impossible to process thought the 27 governments and their respective parliamentary and democratic processes before March 2019, so you might as well forget it and just accept it's a hard Brexit and start preparing for the economic and practical consequences.

Practically speaking, it's an impossibility to do what they are suggesting.

Even the non-political aspects i.e. practical arrangements are not emerging:

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/mar/08/customs-checks-will-cause-huge-tailbacks-warns-calais-port-boss

MrPudding

Peregrinus wrote: »

Well, there may be method in their madness.

Recall that a recurring pattern in the journey toward Brexit has been (a) the EU makes some specific, concrete proposal, usually in the form of a position paper or similar, (b) the UK responds with a speech which rejects the proposal and makes suggestions which are criticised as vague, unrealistic, incomplete, or all three, and (c) at the last minute the UK caves and accepts 90%+ of what the EU originally proposed.

This leads to much criticism of the UK for being inept, uninformed, unprepared, outflanked, etc, etc. But what’s at work here might not be ineptitude; maybe this is a Cunning Plan.

One of my favourite sayings, and one I try to apply to my interactions with people, is "never put down to maliciousness that which can be adequately explained by stupidity." Since the brexit vote, and more specifically since May became PM and formed a cabinet of unparalleled apparent unsuitability and incompetence, I have had to adapt my favourite saying to create a new one. It is "never put down to competence and cunning that which can adequately be explained by stupidity and incompetence."

Whilst I would dearly love to think there was some cunning plan afoot to frustrate the will of the idiots, I really don't think there is. If you look back through TM's career there simply isn't anything to indicate any kind of cunning or even competence. Look at her cabinet, seriously, look at it. Hammond might have some competence (though I disagree with his policies, well, I disagree with tories in general), Davis, BoJo and Fox are idiots*.

There is no cunning plan here. They really are that bad. In politics they have found a career where competence is irrelevant. As a politician you can mess everything you touch up, and so long as you get elected, you will keep your job, and maybe even get promoted. Just look at Grayling. Has he ever done anything right? Anything?

TM is not playing a blinder, she is not plotting, we are not moving toward a grand reveal where we will all stand back and applaud, asking ourselves how we ever doubted her. She is just really, really bad at her job, and instead of surrounded herself with people that are actually competent, she has surrounded herself with people that are arguably even more incompetent than she is. In fact, that is probably the only impressive thing she has done, actually managed to find people more incompetent than she is herself, and promote them. She is a terrible politician, a terrible PM, and if you followed her career in the home office, a terrible human being.

I hope that history paints them as the monsters they are.

MrP




* What I will say is that this crowd do some to have some cunning and competence, but that is only in relation to self-preservation and self-interest. They appear to be very good at that, but in terms of doing their actual job, improving/not damaging the country, all that good stuff, they either can't or simply won't do it.

J Mysterio

Skedaddle wrote: »

I just find a lot of things about the UK a little strange. Everything about it is vaguely defined. Even the fact that it isn't neither a federal state nor a single country. It's a sort of nebulously structured 'entity' where you've 4 different nations and endless squabbling over what to call those parts - are they countries, nations, states? They don't even play most sports, other than the olympics as a single entity together and when they do they use the term "Team GB" which technically does not refer to Northern Ireland.

Even the term "British" is controversial as it fundamentally excludes Northern Ireland which is part of the United Kingdom, not Britain.

It's just an odd place that seems to have a lot of kludges and identity crises. It's really no surprise that it's not able to deal with the concept of being an EU member.

Skedaddle

Blackadder often had some genuinely cunning plans, but alas, we are stuck with one of Baldrick's cunning plans, which likely involves a turnip. Meanwhile Lord Melchett is in charge of diplomacy and strategy.

The Blackadder writers could have easily designed the plot for Brexit. It would be comedy gold if it weren't so serious!

BonnieSituation

J Mysterio wrote: »

I like these sorts of infographics but the Olympics one should be joint in the north as the OCI has partial "jurisdiction".

Sam Russell

Skedaddle wrote: »

It's actually quite bizarre when you think bout it: The Republic Ireland leaving the UK was the single most significant structural event to happen to it in centuries. Irish history, certainly until 1922 and all of modern Northern Irish history is a fundamental part of British or UK history. You can't really just lop it off and pretend it has nothing to do with you.

It's just a bit weird that there's no general awareness of even the broad outline of Irish history. I mean, I have actually had more informed views of Irish history from French people than I have had from people living in England. Maybe it's just that the historians are finding it 'too close for comfort' and an awkward embarrassment? I know for example, Irish history teachers completely avoided the civil war for decades.

Or, is it just classical imperial revisionism? As I similarly note that a lot of people seem to have a very 'warm and cuddly' view of the British Empire that it really does not deserve. I find that quite at odds with the French view of their imperial period which seems to sit very uncomfortably with their notion of modern, human rights based republicanism and revolutionary values. So, they can usually place it into context and condemn and disown it to a large degree.

I just find a lot of things about the UK a little strange. Everything about it is vaguely defined. Even the fact that it isn't neither a federal state nor a single country. It's a sort of nebulously structured 'entity' where you've 4 different nations and endless squabbling over what to call those parts - are they countries, nations, states? They don't even play most sports, other than the olympics as a single entity together and when they do they use the term "Team GB" which technically does not refer to Northern Ireland.

Even the term "British" is controversial as it fundamentally excludes Northern Ireland which is part of the United Kingdom, not Britain.

It's just an odd place that seems to have a lot of kludges and identity crises. It's really no surprise that it's not able to deal with the concept of being an EU member.

The UK is the only country in the world not to have any name on its stamps.

The FA is the only football association not to have its name in its title.

The Unionists in NI claim to be British but that is one thing they are not - they are Irish.

The UK is ruled by the Queen of England. Wales has a Prince of Wales, but Scotland has neither.

The central bank is the Bank of England.

Scotland, Wales and NI all have regional assemblies. England does not.

Scotland and Wales have 'national' anthems. NI and England use 'God save .. etc.'

Scottish Law is completely different from English law.

No wonder they have an identity crisis.

Leroy42

They don't have an identity crisis, they know exactly who they want to be.

The problem is that the world has moved on and no longer longing for the British way or see it as superior.

And in terms of Irish history, why would they teach what was effectively the death nail to the empire. To have such a close neighbour and dependant opt to break away was a poor sign for the continued might of the empire.

trellheim

For comic relief Breitbart are claiming a 2.4 billion fine

http://www.breitbart.com/london/2018/03/09/eu-demands-2-4-billion-fine-ahead-brexit-talks-control-borders/


Breitbart ! I thought they were gone since Milo headed off

Skedaddle

They're not entirely inaccurate:

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/mar/08/uk-faces-2bn-fine-over-chinese-imports-scam-say-eu-anti-fraud-investigators

The UK is facing a huge fine for allegedly failing to enforce EU customs borders at British ports and airports and allowing a flood of counterfeit and other illegal goods into the single market.

It has nothing to do with Brexit though - it's a pre-existing issue with policing of incoming goods being processed through UK ports by logistics operators.

Where this is playing into Brexit is more that it's being pointed out that they have a poor track record on enforcing the existing customs rules, so why should we trust a loose harmonisation under what May's proposing with her 'regulatory alignment'. They could end up just being the weak point that floods the EU market with even more stuff and we'd have no comeback at all, as they're refusing to accept ECJ jurisdiction.

First Up

Skedaddle wrote: »

They're not entirely inaccurate:

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/mar/08/uk-faces-2bn-fine-over-chinese-imports-scam-say-eu-anti-fraud-investigators

The UK is facing a huge fine for allegedly failing to enforce EU customs borders at British ports and airports and allowing a flood of counterfeit and other illegal goods into the single market.

It has nothing to do with Brexit though - it's a pre-existing issue with policing of incoming goods being processed through UK ports by logistics operators.

Where this is playing into Brexit is more that it's being pointed out that they have a poor track record on enforcing the existing customs rules, so why should we trust a loose harmonisation under what May's proposing with her 'regulatory alignment'. They could end up just being the weak point that floods the EU market with even more stuff and we'd have no comeback at all, as they're refusing to accept ECJ jurisdiction.

This is exactly why an open border in Ireland would leave us vulnerable to EU concern's about the integrity of any boundary to the Single Market if its left to the UK to administer any of its borders.

Skedaddle

Well that's the problem - without Northern Ireland or the UK being actually in a proper customs union, with judicial oversight, it's not going to work. We are going to have to inspect stuff.

The Tories have more or less stated that they want to turn Britain into a tax and regulatory haven i.e. "get rid of red tape" which would imply that they will be totally untrustworthy as a source of goods and may be importing all sorts of junk into their own market and by extension the EU.

When you see various tories trying to defend US food standards and so on and implying that people are being ridiculous for not wanting chlorinated chicken and GMOs, you can see where this is going.

At the very least, Northern Ireland should opt into the EU's agri-food laws to avoid major issues with that kind of business on this island.

Brexit creates an insoluble problem with the border. Repeatedly stating that the problem is going to go away or that there's a, yet to be announced, technical solution is not helpful and is frankly ridiculous.

The UK spent vast amounts of money trying to implement a far simpler, e-borders solution for non-EU access to the UK. So far it's been building the system since 2003 and has spent (by 2015) £830 million an still failed to deliver the project as intended.

National Audit Office report : https://www.nao.org.uk/report/home-office-e-borders-and-successor-programmes/

So basically it's taken 15 years and nearly €1 billion to deliver a far less ambitious system that involved no scanning of road traffic. It's primarily just for airports, which are far, far easier to deal with. There's some element of control of sea ports, but the UK has relatively little non-EU / non-EEA sea port passenger traffic, certainly not of the regular scheduled variety anyway.

So, you're really looking at an incredible amount of b/s being presented as workable solutions.

This border thing is simply not going to work. If it's implemented as a hard border you're going to have queues down the M1 as far as Dundalk, closed roads on the border, guards all over the place and serious lashing of money on resources.

Then in Britain itself you're looking motorways in the south of England permanently clogged with queuing traffic. There is nowhere to handle this stuff. There are no adequately sized customs posts, no staff to man them and it's the same in France.

At least the Dutch have started some degree of strategic planning.

The whole thing is a complete farce no matter what way you look at it. The fact that the British media is continuing to even entertain the notion that this is even possible is part of the problem.

Anyone going on a TV show saying that there's an e-border solution to NI or the sea ports to the continent and one that can be implemented by May 2019 needs to be laughed off the set.

It's all absolute b/s and anyone who has any notion of how logistics systems work knows that.

If nobody in Britain starts pointing out the fact that the emperor / empress has no clothes, then he or she going to continue walking around naked making a complete fool of themselves and the nation.

The time for allowing fools to utter unchallenged nonsense has to end! They are running a major country, not having a flame war on Twitter.

Vronsky

Of course, if the "No deal" comes to pass it will effectively force the UK to open up it's markets tariff and regulation free to everyone at least for a limited time, (long enough for a small cohort to make a lot of money) otherwise it risks stalling a lot of it's economy, and potential food shortages.

The problems then would be on the EU side.

Sam Russell

Vronsky wrote: »

Of course, if the "No deal" comes to pass it will effectively force the UK to open up it's markets tariff and regulation free to everyone at least for a limited time, (long enough for a small cohort to make a lot of money) otherwise it risks stalling a lot of it's economy, and potential food shortages.

The problems then would be on the EU side.

I doubt that that is the way it would play out.

A 'no deal' would result in 'no planes' first. Second, no trucks passing through Calais, and so they would all be queued up the M2. I would think the Channel Tunnel would be suspended. Already the Calais people have already said they expect 50 km tailbacks on roads leading to Calais.

The NI border would be the least problem, but all we would need to do is instruct all commercial traffic to use approved crossing points and erect a few temporary customs check points, plus a few roaming ones as a fix.

It would not last long.

Lemming

Vronsky wrote: »

Of course, if the "No deal" comes to pass it will effectively force the UK to open up it's markets tariff and regulation free to everyone at least for a limited time, (long enough for a small cohort to make a lot of money) otherwise it risks stalling a lot of it's economy, and potential food shortages.

The problems then would be on the EU side.

"Long enough" means absolutely squat in trade-negotiation terms. You may find that the "not our problem" for the UK would rapidly be replaced by the far more serious multi-faceted issue of single-handedly annihilating the UK's domestic industries, thus causing mass unemployment, massive drop in revenue intake for government coffers and a simultaneous surge in demands placed on social welfare services all pretty much in short-order of each other.

"Not our problem" indeed, if you are of course a tax-evading and rather wealthy individual.

demfad

Vronsky wrote: »

Of course, if the "No deal" comes to pass it will effectively force the UK to open up it's markets tariff and regulation free to everyone at least for a limited time, (long enough for a small cohort to make a lot of money) otherwise it risks stalling a lot of it's economy, and potential food shortages.

The problems then would be on the EU side.

If they eliminate tarrffs to the EU, most favoured country means they have to open up the markets to the world.

This would also mean that the UK would not be party to any EU FTAs and countries importing goods produced in the UK could apply their usual WTO tarriffs. Exports would stall, imports would smother local business and the national debt would immediately be unsustainable.

Also, the 62,000 UK hauliers currently trading with the EU would have to fight for 3000 3rd country haulier licences.

This 3000 would experience immediate issues. As no regulatory agreement with EU each container would have to be pulled aside and tested. At a cost of £2000 and two weeks time, and their business most likely.

This is before we come to grounded airplanes.

The UK would come cap in hand to the EU, the EU would adopt an emergency transition under very harsh penalty.

That's what no-deal means. The Legatum Institute will get rich though betting against Sterling, and shorting stocks etc.

demfad

Lemming wrote: »

"Long enough" means absolutely squat in trade-negotiation terms. You may find that the "not our problem" for the UK would rapidly be replaced by the far more serious multi-faceted issue of single-handedly annihilating the UK's domestic industries, thus causing mass unemployment, massive drop in revenue intake for government coffers and a simultaneous surge in demands placed on social welfare services all pretty much in short-order of each other.

"Not our problem" indeed, if you are of course a tax-evading and rather wealthy individual.

Perfect time for Russia to strike with a few of the perfected "North Korean" viruses etc. to finish the job. These are dangerous times.

Lemming

demfad wrote: »

Perfect time for Russia to strike with a few of the perfected "North Korean" viruses etc. to finish the job. These are dangerous times.

You don't think that opening the UK's borders - however briefly "long enough" entails to negotiate meaningful trade terms with anybody else - would bring the UK's domestic industries to their knees, see significantly large numbers of people lose their jobs and thus placing strain on the social welfare system whilst lowering the government's tax take?

Angry bird

It's all a bit pointless. Brexiteers are following the dream, the EU rules of engagement are largely irrelevant for them. Whilst enjoyable, sneering at their position, it is not going to change their mind. Just got to go through the motions until exit day next year. The current UK parliament are impotent, both the government and opposition, are impotent vs the hard brexiters. The majority of people just want to get on with it, exit the EU and hope it'll be alright on the night. After a few years or parliament terms, having possibly discovered that splendid isolation is not for them, in the likely absence of any deals with anyone, then perhaps rationality will return. We just have to leave them at it, dial down the 'they're ejits' line and concentrate on NI.

If the above scenario proves true, it's bad news for our island so we gotta start actively preparing for the worst hard Brexit.

Capt'n Midnight

Sam Russell wrote: »

Already the Calais people have already said they expect 50 km tailbacks on roads leading to Calais.

The 50Km is not hyperbole. A French strike showed exactly what could happen.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/mar/08/customs-checks-will-cause-huge-tailbacks-warns-calais-port-boss

He said Calais could return to the havoc of July 2015 when truckers were trapped in their cabs for three days in searing heat with 30-mile queues from Calais to Dunkirk, 25 miles inland to St Omer and 20 miles west to Boulogne.

trellheim

t's all a bit pointless. Brexiteers are following the dream, the EU rules of engagement are largely irrelevant for them. Whilst enjoyable, sneering at their position, it is not going to change their mind. Just got to go through the motions until exit day next year. The current UK parliament are impotent, both the government and opposition, are impotent vs the hard brexiters. The majority of people just want to get on with it, exit the EU and hope it'll be alright on the night. After a few years or parliament terms, having possibly discovered that splendid isolation is not for them, in the likely absence of any deals with anyone, then perhaps rationality will return. We just have to leave them at it, dial down the 'they're ejits' line and concentrate on NI.

If the above scenario proves true, it's bad news for our island so we gotta start actively preparing for the worst hard Brexit.

Somewhat missing a major point -

IF you voted in the House of Commons now for the UK exiting the EU - just that alone - it would still pass with a huge majority from Labour and the Conservatives. That is the situation - there is no silent MPs here - the UK wants out, right or wrong. Only a final deal vote has any chance of scuppering it.

Dont get me wrong - they said many enough times in the past we ( Ireland) could not stand on our own - perhaps they feel the same and want out no matter the cost so the fair part of me says - I cant argue too much with that.

Angry bird

trellheim wrote: »

t's all a bit pointless. Brexiteers are following the dream, the EU rules of engagement are largely irrelevant for them. Whilst enjoyable, sneering at their position, it is not going to change their mind. Just got to go through the motions until exit day next year. The current UK parliament are impotent, both the government and opposition, are impotent vs the hard brexiters. The majority of people just want to get on with it, exit the EU and hope it'll be alright on the night. After a few years or parliament terms, having possibly discovered that splendid isolation is not for them, in the likely absence of any deals with anyone, then perhaps rationality will return. We just have to leave them at it, dial down the 'they're ejits' line and concentrate on NI.

If the above scenario proves true, it's bad news for our island so we gotta start actively preparing for the worst hard Brexit.

Somewhat missing a major point -

IF you voted in the House of Commons now for the UK exiting the EU - just that alone - it would still pass with a huge majority from Labour and the Conservatives. That is the situation - there is no silent MPs here - the UK wants out, right or wrong. Only a final deal vote has any chance of scuppering it.

Dont get me wrong - they said many enough times in the past we ( Ireland) could not stand on our own - perhaps they feel the same and want out no matter the cost so the fair part of me says - I cant argue too much with that.

The point is, I think there will be a hard Brexit. The UK will only change their mind if they determine that having lived hard brexit for a while, that it's no longer for them. Nothing Ireland or the EU say now will change their minds. I hope rationality will prevail in the UK, but no I'm not predicting it, now or in a few years.

Bigus

The comments sections in the various articles linked above are showing a marked change in tune towards a u turn , against Brexit.

Jim2007

Angry bird wrote: »

After a few years or parliament terms, having possibly discovered that splendid isolation is not for them, in the likely absence of any deals with anyone, then perhaps rationality will return.

But back is never going to be an option. The EU is travelling in a one direction and the UK want's it to go in another. Without the UK's continual objection the EU will be a very different place in 5 or 10 years time. And the price the UK would have to pay to get back in will simply be too much for them.

I expect the 51s state of the Union is not far a way....

trellheim

the Euro and Schengen are mandatory for joiners now , that would kibosh the UK rejoining

Tropheus

Bigus wrote: »

The comments sections in the various articles linked above are showing a marked change in tune towards a u turn , against Brexit.

Depends on where the comments are posted. You certainly won't see a change of heart in the Mail, Express or Telegraph comments.

Zubeneschamali

The UK cannot feed its people. Hard Brexit would mean no food. It's impossible so they will cave.

The End.

demfad

Lemming wrote: »

You don't think that opening the UK's borders - however briefly "long enough" entails to negotiate meaningful trade terms with anybody else - would bring the UK's domestic industries to their knees, see significantly large numbers of people lose their jobs and thus placing strain on the social welfare system whilst lowering the government's tax take?

Yes, and more. https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=106388833&postcount=5724

Nody

Lemming wrote: »

You don't think that opening the UK's borders - however briefly "long enough" entails to negotiate meaningful trade terms with anybody else - would bring the UK's domestic industries to their knees, see significantly large numbers of people lose their jobs and thus placing strain on the social welfare system whilst lowering the government's tax take?

I'd expect them to ignore WTO rules and only open it to EU and take the medium/long term consequences later as I think it was Peregrinus who mentioned it earlier. It would be exactly in line with how UK deals with these issues today and it would solve the immediate problem and kick the can down the road for "magic solutions" to appear.

Vronsky

Sam Russell wrote: »

I doubt that that is the way it would play out.

A 'no deal' would result in 'no planes' first. Second, no trucks passing through Calais, and so they would all be queued up the M2. I would think the Channel Tunnel would be suspended. Already the Calais people have already said they expect 50 km tailbacks on roads leading to Calais.

The NI border would be the least problem, but all we would need to do is instruct all commercial traffic to use approved crossing points and erect a few temporary customs check points, plus a few roaming ones as a fix.

It would not last long.

As far as I know, WTO allows states to take emergency measures to defend national security. If the UK drops all tariffs for imports to all comers as well as regulation then there won't be queues at calais. The queues would be in Dover for UK exports.

Now you'll say that such a move would destroy UK industry, but what if such a measure caused the pound to collapse. Instantly the UK becomes more competitive, but its population far poorer. You would see a resurgence in primary industry as imports become far more expensive for industry and consumers alike.

The interim period would be so tumultuous that the UK would need some form of bailout, since the collapse in the pound (rather its high value exports) would mean it wouldn't be able to fund its external liabilities and its new industry takes time to build.

Angry bird

trellheim wrote: »

the Euro and Schengen are mandatory for joiners now , that would kibosh the UK rejoining

That goes without saying, nor would the EU want them back. A future trade deal is where there may be action.

CelticRambler

Vronsky wrote: »

Now you'll say that such a move would destroy UK industry, but what if such a measure caused the pound to collapse. Instantly the UK becomes more competitive, but its population far poorer. You would see a resurgence in primary industry as imports become far more expensive for industry and consumers alike.

You can only have a resurgence of primary industry if it already exists. In the UK, that's not the case. Services account for 80% of the UK's GDP, industry less than 20%, and of that 20% how much can survive the disruption of a hard Brexit, e.g. the manufacture of Airbus wings?

Sam Russell

CelticRambler wrote: »

You can only have a resurgence of primary industry if it already exists. In the UK, that's not the case. Services account for 80% of the UK's GDP, industry less than 20%, and of that 20% how much can survive the disruption of a hard Brexit, e.g. the manufacture of Airbus wings?

80% of cars assembly is exported and 70% of the content of those vehicles is imported on JIT production lines. If exports are blocked, then there is little point in assembling the vehicles, and imports will be delayed for sure (since the HGVs will be stuck on the M2 heading for Dover).

Then there is the question of HGV driving licences - will the EU recognise the UK version?

If it gets nasty, it will get very nasty. In the face of even half of this doom, they will fold. Even at the last moment, they will get a transition - providing they pay up and keep the border here open.

Infini

trellheim wrote: »

the Euro and Schengen are mandatory for joiners now , that would kibosh the UK rejoining

The Euro is perfectly understandable of course as a requirement but Schengen I think is somewhat of an option right now thanks to the migrant crisis (and ironically a factor that pushed Brexit over the line in the first place).

Leroy42

The most optimistic forecasts I have heard talked about, seen little actual evidence mind, is that new trade deals with the rest of the world will bring back lost EU in the medium term.

So after losing nearly a decade to the last recession, they are looking like, everything going well, another lost decade.

I fully agree with a previous post that said that no amount of scaremongering, or as it used to be known as 'pointing out the most likely', will change the peoples minds. They have been fed on a diet of anti EU propaganda and misinformation for so long now they don't believe anything. They have even gone as far as claiming that their own civil service is a lackey for the EU and not to be trusted.

Just think about the logic of that. They want to take back control and be run by a civil service that they believe are actively working against HMG!

I understand their desire to take back control, but I would have thought, given they themselves are in a union, they would appreciate that the world no longer works as it did in the empire days.

They have landed at the perfect storm. An electorate unhappy at the ways things are and so, rightfully, looking for change. A PM with no discernable leadership abilities or underlying policy, a disunified cabinet, and a poor opposition that can't even agree with itself never mind lead the country.

I get the feeling that the EUs position is getting more entrenched by the day, and the UK is running out of road. But far from looking to rein things back, I think the UK is actually hardening to want a hard brexit.

Skedaddle

Seems there are rumours that the UK might attempt to cut a tarrif exemption with the US on steel, outside the EU.

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-03-09/may-could-seek-u-k-tariff-deal-with-trump-risking-eu-backlash

Surely that would effectively end its membership of the single market forthwith.

Charles Babbage

Jim2007 wrote: »

But back is never going to be an option. The EU is travelling in a one direction and the UK want's it to go in another. Without the UK's continual objection the EU will be a very different place in 5 or 10 years time. And the price the UK would have to pay to get back in will simply be too much for them.

The UK could have been a bit more cooperative whiile in the EU it could have made some common cause with the likes of Sweden and Denmark and perhaps a two tier EU could have resulted.

2ygb4cmqetsjhx

The prospect of a hard Brexit is highly exciting to be honest. I think it's suicide for the UK. But when I read the media there I think there is no talking to them. They are hell bent on slamming the door on the way out. I think ironically a few decades of being a small country at the mercy of larger powers will teach them a thing or two. Schadenfreude.

Capt'n Midnight

Skedaddle wrote: »

Seems there are rumours that the UK might attempt to cut a tarrif exemption with the US on steel, outside the EU.

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-03-09/may-could-seek-u-k-tariff-deal-with-trump-risking-eu-backlash

Surely that would effectively end its membership of the single market forthwith.

LOL

In reality it's the EU that's looking for an exemption, which the UK will automatically get until Brexit kicks in.
https://www.irishtimes.com/business/economy/eu-expects-exemption-from-us-steel-and-aluminium-tariffs-1.3421045

European Union trade chief Cecilia Malmstrom vowed to press for a European Union exemption from United States tariffs on foreign steel and aluminium when she meets her American counterpart in Brussels on Saturday.

Technically the UK can't do their own trade deals while they are in the EU so it's just taking credit for what the EU has done for them, again...

More theatre.

The reality is that roaming charges are heading back.

Water John

I suggest taking up some extreme sport to get your kicks.
Real life can do without, this possible clusterf**k.

Capt'n Midnight

Sam Russell wrote: »

80% of cars assembly is exported and 70% of the content of those vehicles is imported on JIT production lines.
...

If it gets nasty, it will get very nasty.

The 70% foreign content means they will be screwed under WTO rules.

Sand

Skedaddle wrote: »

I just find a lot of things about the UK a little strange. Everything about it is vaguely defined. Even the fact that it isn't neither a federal state nor a single country. It's a sort of nebulously structured 'entity' where you've 4 different nations and endless squabbling over what to call those parts - are they countries, nations, states? They don't even play most sports, other than the olympics as a single entity together and when they do they use the term "Team GB" which technically does not refer to Northern Ireland.

That's the core issue behind Brexit. England is the elephant in the room. Unlike Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland it has no political or cultural expression beyond being humiliated by foreigners in its national game every 2-4 years.

'British' is often mistaken as codeword for 'Greater England' but its not quite true. British is an upper class/imperial identity. The English gentry acknowledged that the Scottish, Welsh and Northern Irish gentry could never be English, but they could buy into this artificial British identity which offered them access to the levers of power in a global empire. The lower class English never could though they were taught to aspire to it. The Empire is gone. but British identity with its aspiration to global power remains as do the English. So you have this crazed dichotomy between an almost pastoral English identity, and globalist British identity. England can be European, but Britain must be a global Empire. What is most sad is that many, even most, of the English cultural elite deny they are English at all, preferring to style themselves as British or European. You have an English nation bereft of the English poets, artists, musicians, playwrights, writers and so on who would give a voice to their countrymen.

The UK is a bizarre country. Its what was left over after the Empire and aristocratic interests which bound it together died. The peoples of that country are still working through the trauma. I think a rejuvenated England can rejoin the EU, but I'm not so sure that Britain can.

Peregrinus

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

Is Davis supposed to be in on it along with his delegation? Because that seems highly unlikely. Or is May playing a lone game, relying on Davis and the Brexiteers to be complete idiots?

Given the numbers of people involved, I think this cunning "Plamás the Brexiteers and then surrender to the EU at the last minute" policy would have leaked by now.

I think they are just incompetent and in over their heads.

MrPudding wrote: »

One of my favourite sayings, and one I try to apply to my interactions with people, is "never put down to maliciousness that which can be adequately explained by stupidity." Since the brexit vote, and more specifically since May became PM and formed a cabinet of unparalleled apparent unsuitability and incompetence, I have had to adapt my favourite saying to create a new one. It is "never put down to competence and cunning that which can adequately be explained by stupidity and incompetence." . . .

There is no cunning plan here.

Well, maybe I overstated the case a bit in calling it a "cunning plan" (but I did want you all to think of Baldrick). Perhaps it's not so much a cunning plan as a strategy they have stumbled into as the result of their immediate reaction to the short-term pressures to which they are exposed from various directions. Still, it's a strategy that I would argue is working - so far, anyway.

From where we are now, there's really only two possible outcomes - Brexit with a deal on terms acceptable to the EU, or a no-deal hardest-of-hard Brexit. The other two outcomes that people talk about - Brexit with a have-cake-and-eat-it deal, and Brexit getting called off - are pipe dreams. They are not going to eventuate. They never were.

Right. As between the two possible outcomes, whether by luck or judgment May is still on course for the one she wants. At every point where it has been necessary to do so in order to stay on course, May has caved to the EU, and has survived. And her strategic position, bolstered by the bogeyman of Corbyn and his (to Tory minds) inexplicable popularity is such that, if she keeps doing this, she may yet pull it off. And she may not be entirely insensible of that.