Brexit discussion thread III

kowtow

I'd say the market thinks there is a deal already.

Having said, once the next few days of fuss have blown over, I'm not sure I'd want to be long too much sterling.

Kermit.de.frog

More from Tony Connelly

https://twitter.com/tconnellyRTE/status/938840053568155648


Yes, PM has to do it right this time...

Kermit.de.frog

FT now reporting the timing of statement is to ratchet up pressure on British govt to get deal tonight.

judeboy101

Regulatory alignment for whole of uk, to be teased out in phase 2 with Mondays deal as a backup incase of a hard brexit?

Sam Russell

judeboy101 wrote: »

Regulatory alignment for whole of uk, to be teased out in phase 2 with Mondays deal as a backup incase of a hard brexit?

That would suggest 'Nothing is agreed until everything is agreed' cannot be true.

If the UK agree to pay the amount due, then they pay that whatever the outcome as it is due for past commitments.

If the UK Gov agree to 'No border on the Island of Ireland - in the event of no deal, then that must stand or better than that whatever the phase II discussions throw up.

If they agree to ECJ oversight of EU citizens rights post Brexit, then this must stand whatever the result of Phase II.

Otherwise, why bother with Phase I if they can tear up the topics already agreed if they do not like Phase II or Phase III?

Leonard Hofstadter

According to Tony Conolly Varakdar and May have been conversing this evening, she's also been speaking with Juncker.

https://twitter.com/tconnellyRTE/status/938845359060783104

Sounds like a deal is done, but it sounded like very like that on Monday morning as well.

If (and it's a big if at the moment) the UK agrees to regulatory alignment it would be exactly what we wanted, not to mention the 48% of remain voters.

It would be analogous to a soft Brexit in all but name, which is a much better outcome for us but especially for the UK. Still not going to be anywhere near as good as staying in the EU but it will make the decision to leave the EU a lot less bad.

FrancieBrady

captainspeed wrote: »

According to Tony Conolly Varakdar and May have been conversing this evening, she's also been speaking with Juncker.

Sounds like a deal is done, but it sounded like very like that on Monday morning as well.

If the UK agrees to regulatory alignment it would be exactly what we wanted, not to mention the 48% of remain voters.

It would be analogous to a soft Brexit in all but name, which is a much better outcome for us but especially for the UK. Still not going to be anywhere near as good as staying in the EU but it will make the decision to leave the EU a lot less bad.

She could also be signing her own death warrant. Spark a Brexiteer push against her?

blanch152

captainspeed wrote: »

According to Tony Conolly Varakdar and May have been conversing this evening, she's also been speaking with Juncker.

https://twitter.com/tconnellyRTE/status/938845359060783104

Sounds like a deal is done, but it sounded like very like that on Monday morning as well.

If (and it's a big if at the moment) the UK agrees to regulatory alignment it would be exactly what we wanted, not to mention the 48% of remain voters.

It would be analogous to a soft Brexit in all but name, which is a much better outcome for us but especially for the UK. Still not going to be anywhere near as good as staying in the EU but it will make the decision to leave the EU a lot less bad.

And all because the DUP wouldn't play ball on Monday, wrong motivation, right result.

Sam Russell

blanch152 wrote: »

And all because the DUP wouldn't play ball on Monday, wrong motivation, right result.

But mostly because May was unable to lead - if she had called the DUP out, they would not have derailed the agreement.

Would they have brought down the Gov? Doubt it.

Samaris

The one hing I'm a bit worried about is - admittedly, some years down the road.

Britain leaves, soft Brexit. It's still going to hurt. There will be things that they expected to be doing that will be harder due to still being in the CU/regulatory alignment/whatever the hell they decide on. It will be absolutely arguable that having done a hard Brexit would have resulted in chaos (and it would), but I could see all of this happening again in four years or so as reality of being outside the EU bites hard and rather than it being blamed on an idiotic decision undertaken with little planning and no common sense, it will be played up as being all the fault of being in regulatory alignment with the EU (i.e. We can't make trade deals! We can't have our bonfire of regulations and this is why thing are ****! I think I saw a Polish person yesterday!)

I dunno. If someone with a bit of cop on doesn't get into power before this devolves even more, I think we're only prolonging Brexit 2.0 in 2022 or so. I hope I'm wrong, because this is the deal that we want (just with the caveat of hoping that Britain does not go more crazy in the meantime).

As for Shulz, I'm not impressed by what seems like an atrociously badly-timed comment. Last year, euroskepticism was on the rise. It was most noticeable in places like UK, Hungary, Poland. But it was also there in the more central EU countries. The "EU federal state" thing was there in the early stages and there is still a relatively small bloc that want it, but a lot more that don't. Brexit united the EU, and has continued to sacrifice its reputation and make the EU look far less of an ogre than English-speaking media at the least liked the play up.

Saying this now, to me, risks undoing a lot of good work (or in the case of Westminster, appalling lack of work). And I honestly think it a pipe-dream anyway, at least for the next forty years or so. I certainly don't think it is time now. There is still a two-speed Europe and that is probably wiser than trying to integrate all countries too tightly now. If my children or grandchildren vote for a federalised Europe, well, perhaps by then it will be a better choice than it is now. But I don't see it happening any time soon.

In terms of my own position on it - I'm neutral to somewhat negative, but I'll freely admit I don't entirely understand it.

blanch152

blanch152 wrote: »

And all because the DUP wouldn't play ball on Monday, wrong motivation, right result.

Not really. Let's consider the DUP position for a moment as an eminently predictable standard unionist position, as discussed.

May and EU decide that the Reddest of Red Lines is that there is no border in Ireland.

This means that NI must be in Single Market*

May should understand that DUP won't swallow NI in Single Market* and UK outside it.

May has the option of affirming that the Reddest of Red Lines of no NI border means that the UK cannot leave the Single Market*.

That's not what she does though, is it?

All our government is asking for is clarity over which of these mutually incompatible Red Lines are the Reddest. Once we all find that out, we can start working to find a possible outcome. As it stands, we have three parts of the UK government pulling the UK in 3 different directions.

Single Market* - through EU, through EEA, through EFTA (any of these options)

Kermit.de.frog

Latest

https://twitter.com/MargSchinas/status/938854542782984193


A bit of a tussle going on. You can only imagine the type of language the DUP would be trying to get in.

LeinsterDub

So let's assume a deal has been done for regulatory alignment, a massive exit bill and citizens rights .

What benefits has brexit delivered the UK if any?

LeinsterDub

LeinsterDub wrote: »

So let's assume a deal has been done for regulatory alignment, a massive exit bill and citizens rights .

What benefits has brexit delivered the UK if any?

To be facetious, they begun to deliver on the Tory Manifesto promise of reducing net immigration to the tens of thousands.

ancapailldorcha

LeinsterDub wrote: »

So let's assume a deal has been done for regulatory alignment, a massive exit bill and citizens rights .

What benefits has brexit delivered the UK if any?

None whatsoever. It's less control than the UK had on the 22nd of June. However, this was widely known before the referendum.

FrancieBrady

Did I miss a tweet or news link. Why are we ruling out that the 'deal' is not just a phrase ensuring the integrity of the Union?

http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-42273941

A tweet linked..

Before we go bonkers this seems to be situation -
1. a potential solution been worked up + looked at favourably in London, Brussels + Dublin
2. EU + Dublin sound positive about it
3. UK govt believes there is progress but it isn't over
4. DUP hasn't yet signed off #noeurostaryet

LeinsterDub

[Deleted User] wrote: »

To be facetious, they begun to deliver on the Tory Manifesto promise of reducing net immigration to the tens of thousands.

Have they? I thought we were getting a quid pro quo on citizens rights and the free movement of people?

Leroy42

LeinsterDub wrote: »

Have they? I thought we were getting a quid pro quo on citizens rights and the free movement of people?

They mean that net immigration in the UK has dropped massively since the Brexit vote. This is not caused by any changes in regs etc but just that people don't feel that the UK is either a welcoming place or a place to build a life and so opt for somewhere else.

As immigration was one of, or IMO THE, issue, they have won either way

Beechwoodspark

blanch152 wrote: »

And all because the DUP wouldn't play ball on Monday, wrong motivation, right result.

Don't forget that the dup are extremely corrupt-see the "cash for ash" scandal that still hasn't been investigated fully

leakyboots

kowtow wrote: »

I reckon when people start throwing deadlines out in public - especially ones that move closer - it means we are at the vinegar strokes.

Agreement before the weekend, perhaps.

Just catching up on the thread today (great work everyone, it makes for great reading)... I had to google the term above - wonderful new phrase for the lexicon :pac:

An Ciarraioch

Caution - we're still working: DUP to Faisal Islam:

https://mobile.twitter.com/faisalislam/status/938868798207287296

flutered

FrancieBrady wrote: »

She could also be signing her own death warrant. Spark a Brexiteer push against her?

but has not the moderates taken a swing at the brexiteers

Samaris

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/sep/07/the-guardian-view-on-the-irish-border-the-uks-brexit-blind-spot

Interesting article from September about why Britain was going to have a hard time with the border. The thing that has just plain irritated me throughout all of this has been the total and casual disregard for the UK's neighbours. Especially the ones that promote the collateral damage as somehow a win.

solodeogloria

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

None whatsoever. It's less control than the UK had on the 22nd of June. However, this was widely known before the referendum.

Good evening!

Respectfully, I disagree. It depends on what is agreed. It also depends on whether or not this alignment requires formal customs union membership and single market membership.

If it doesn't, it is still significantly better than today because it still allows for controls on free movement, and it still allows for more liberal trading arrangements with other countries and less payments into the coffers in Brussels. Albeit on a limited basis.

I'm not entirely happy with this arrangement, but it isn't true yet to say it is worse than the status quo. I would still consider this a successful Brexit, albeit with a lot of unfinished work.

Much thanks,
solodeogloria

Leroy42

solodeogloria wrote: »

Good evening!

Respectfully, I disagree. It depends on what is agreed. It also depends on whether or not this alignment requires formal customs union membership and single market membership.

If it doesn't, it is still significantly better than today because it still allows for controls on free movement, and it still allows for more liberal trading arrangements with other countries and less payments into the coffers in Brussels. Albeit on a limited basis.

I'm not entirely happy with this arrangement, but it isn't true yet to say it is worse than the status quo. I would still consider this a successful Brexit, albeit with a lot of unfinished work.

Much thanks,
solodeogloria

You have no actual position on what a successful Brexit actually means. Only a few weeks ago you deemed more than £20bn unacceptable.

You will deem anything a success simply because that is what the outcome actually is.

Beechwoodspark

solodeogloria wrote: »

Good evening!

Respectfully, I disagree. It depends on what is agreed. It also depends on whether or not this alignment requires formal customs union membership and single market membership.

If it doesn't, it is still significantly better than today because it still allows for controls on free movement, and it still allows for more liberal trading arrangements with other countries and less payments into the coffers in Brussels. Albeit on a limited basis.

I'm not entirely happy with this arrangement, but it isn't true yet to say it is worse than the status quo. I would still consider this a successful Brexit, albeit with a lot of unfinished work.

Much thanks,
solodeogloria

Good evening!!!!


God bless your optimism Solo

Much thanks(?!)

Bws

ancapailldorcha

solodeogloria wrote: »

Good evening!

Respectfully, I disagree. It depends on what is agreed. It also depends on whether or not this alignment requires formal customs union membership and single market membership.

If it doesn't, it is still significantly better than today because it still allows for controls on free movement, and it still allows for more liberal trading arrangements with other countries and less payments into the coffers in Brussels. Albeit on a limited basis.

I'm not entirely happy with this arrangement, but it isn't true yet to say it is worse than the status quo. I would still consider this a successful Brexit, albeit with a lot of unfinished work.

Much thanks,
solodeogloria

Why is controlling free movement a good thing given that it has benefited the country? Especially when over half of immigrants come from outside the EU27, a number which could be easily lowered?

Payments into the EU coffers aren't hampering the economy. You're talking about a few percent of the annual Treasury tax intake. With respect, I think these 2 examples are red herrings.

Given that Theresa May can't even bring the DUP into line, there seems to have been no control regained. How on earth will she deal with countries like India, China, Brazil and the US, exactly?

I posted a link from the Financial Times above you might want to read. It describes the wide adoption of US and EU regulatory frameworks around the world. They're being widely adopted as templates much like English Common Law once upon a time.

An Ciarraioch

Is a text nearly over the line now, pending Varadkar's verdict?

https://mobile.twitter.com/bbclaurak/status/938884187863568384

Impetus

Add in Schengen (passport/id card free travel) and we might have a deal - giving GB the same market access as IRL has within the EU post 'Brexit'. Leaving borderless trade in situ and allowing Europeans to visit Ireland and Britain without participating in a 1h queue for passport/id card checks.

Schengen is a free travel area. It does not allow people to "take jobs" in the area visited. eg I live in Schengen and can visit Switzerland, Norway or Iceland (as well as most of the EU - outside the racist British Isles) without passport checking delays. None of those countries (CH, NO, IS) are in the EU. Get off the plane and get on the airport train/metro/tram within minutes in Schengen countries. The border system in Ireland and Britain is time delaying and pig inefficient.

The message is clear - The "British Isles" (in which I include Ireland) is a pig inefficient transit/visiting zone.

Samaris

An Ciarraioch wrote: »

Is a text nearly over the line now, pending Varadkar's verdict?

https://mobile.twitter.com/bbclaurak/status/938884187863568384

Westminster DUPs are okay with whatever it is, but Stormont might kick off. Which are the crazier DUP lot, or is it much of a muchness?

Also, god knows what the DUP might have tried to get in. It may well end up that whatever they're good with, the Irish government won't stomach. So I hope May has factored that in as she runs off to Brussels to get signatures.

Capt'n Midnight

Calina wrote: »

Norway and Sweden can block EFTA membership. This means EEA is non straightforward as an option.

I am utterly horrified by today's reports about what analysis was or was not done.

Norway and Switzerland

Norway is very like Scotland in many respects. Similar population, exports of energy and fishing* and stuff and wanting to stay in the Common Market etc.

The difference is that because England has a much bigger population Scotland has no real say in the UK as Brexit and the great repeal bill have shown. Or look at the role of the SNP in Westminster.

Don't expect Norway & Co. to let the UK just waltz in and be handed a veto after they've ignored Scottish interests.


*UK going on about how they'll have the 200 mile limit now, most of it is Scottish. And they've already said they'd foreign trawlers in.

An Ciarraioch

More work to be done tomorrow - are they practically writing War and Peace over there?

ancapailldorcha

An Ciarraioch wrote: »

More work to be done tomorrow - are they practically writing War and Peace over there?

Please try and post more constructively than this.

REBELSAFC

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

Given that Theresa May can't even bring the DUP into line, there seems to have been no control regained. How on earth will she deal with countries like India, China, Brazil and the US, exactly?

Never mind these countries, what about Spain (Gibralter) and Argentina(Malvinas)?

Mr.Nice Guy

It looks like a deal is close. I expected our government and the EU to offer a rewording that would act as a compromise of sorts but I really hope they haven't watered this down too much.

FrancieBrady

According to BBC NI it's 'additional wording'.

Sounds like the DUP have blinked?

flatty

FrancieBrady wrote: »

According to BBC NI it's 'additional wording'.

Sounds like the DUP have blinked?

Or banked.

An Ciarraioch

flatty wrote: »

Or banked.

Presumably something along the lines of "Constitutional status of NI within the UK can only be altered in accordance with the GFA" - certainly, anything stronger than that would be unacceptable to Varadkar.

FrancieBrady

An Ciarraioch wrote: »

Presumably something along the lines of "Constitutional status of NI within the UK can only be altered in accordance with the GFA" - certainly, anything stronger than that would be unacceptable to Varadkar.

Which frankly is a waste of a week.

MPFGLB

DUP got their moment in the sun sounding like great unionists
ANd maybe a deal or two

And like the GFA they towed the line

They are not as stupid as they look
NI needs open borders and to be in the customs union ...

Vronsky

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Which frankly is a waste of a week.

Indeed, since it doesn't prevent a sea border, or regulatory divergence from Great Britain. Perhaps the real test will be whether it gets by the extreme right of the Tory party.

I wonder if they (the DUP) have been offered more money to sweeten the deal?

Tangatagamadda Chaddabinga Bonga Bungo

MPFGLB wrote: »

They are not as stupid as they look

It's for that reason that I would welcome them in a borderless yet non unified Ireland. Our population isn't that big. If there was an extra 700,000 Unionists that were rowing with Ireland on all things it could push the whole island to a better economic future.

steddyeddy

Tangatagamadda Chaddabinga Bonga Bungo wrote: »

It's for that reason that I would welcome them in a borderless yet non unified Ireland. Our population isn't that big. If there was an extra 700,000 Unionists that were rowing with Ireland on all things it could push the whole island to a better economic future.

I'd disagree with that. Look at what unionists like the DUP have handled the economy in Northern Ireland.

Capt'n Midnight

solodeogloria wrote: »

I support seeking MiFID II equivalence (for third countries) from the EU Commission. Meaning that financial regulation should be broadly consistent. That would be a choice on the part of the UK.

It's not a choice for the UK.

It's a choice for the EU but not an easy one as they would have to offer the same deal to others.

It's a wish for the UK unless they have something to trade that makes it worth while.

Hint 1 : the service industry is global, if you aren't in the EU you are competing with the likes of India and if your data protection laws diverge from the EU , like the snoopers charter does, then dream on about being allowed process EU data.

Hint 2: most of the UK's goods exports are matched by corresponding imports apart from food and computers (both of which they will have to import regardless of price) and jet turbine exports (which are likely tied up in 20 year contracts so again no leeway)

Junkyard Tom

Let's hope that Varadker and Coveny know that this moment in Irish history is momentous, they should be prepared to reject some sort of fudge and stick with 'no hard border' even if it forces the British to the edge of the cliff.

LeinsterDub

Junkyard Tom wrote: »

Let's hope that Varadker and Coveny know that this moment in Irish history is momentous, they should be prepared to reject some sort of fudge and stick with 'no hard border' even if it forces the British to the edge of the cliff.

What does that mean? We have to be reasonable or else a hard border is guaranteed.

Capt'n Midnight

Meanwhile people continue to vote

Brexit surge: Number of Irish passports issued in 2017 'will pass one million mark'

Junkyard Tom

LeinsterDub wrote: »

What does that mean? We have to be reasonable or else a hard border is guaranteed.

What's being reasonable? We don't have to move one inch from our 'no-hard-border' stance, we have the whole EU on the same page.

They have to be reasonable and not kick the border issue into phase two so they can use Ireland as a pawn.. 'if you don't give us a no-consequences deal you'll be imposing a border in Ireland'.

Let's not be naive and believe Brexiters won't try use their border in Ireland as leverage in future negotiations.

Peregrinus

LeinsterDub wrote: »

What does that mean? We have to be reasonable or else a hard border is guaranteed.

Yes, but it's perfectly reasonable for us to say "we won't accept any Brexit deal that results in a hard border".

Basically, if the choice for us comes down to (a) the UK gets a Brexit deal that results in a hard border, or (b) there's a no-deal Brexit, and a hard border results, the rational and self-interested choice for us is always (b). Both mean we get a hard border in the short term, so there's nothing to choose between them on that basis, but option (a) means the UK gets what it wants and has no need or incentive to move on, whereas option (b) means the UK still needs an EU deal, and knows what it has to do if it is to get one.

Neither option is good for us; neither of them is what we want. But option (b) is the less bad of the two.