Brexit discussion thread III

Kermit.de.frog

https://twitter.com/NadineDorries/status/1004656199885836288

https://twitter.com/IanDunt/status/1004656730427543553




Welcome to The Onion Zone

Professor Moriarty

Anthracite wrote: »

Brexit logic therefore suggests that we hold the upper hand here and that UK car makers will force the UK to back down and agree to whatever we demand.

I never realised that car makers ran the EU. You learn something new every day.

EdgeCase

Where does he get his figures on exports ?!
I find it odd that nobody in the UK media seems to have these figures at hand.

65% of Irish exports do not “end up in the UK” approximately 13.5% do.

As for Irish goods transiting the UK to the continent and elsewhere, if he wants to turn his nose up at significant % or the business of UK logistics companies, ports and airports and make the country into some kind of rogue state, using goods transportation embargoes politically, sort of like what Russia does with gas, well, good luck with that. You won’t be needing that 3rd runway at LHR due to being a hermit state backwater that nobody trusts anymore.

Businesses do not like having the rug pulled from under them by irrational political decisions that have no economic or business basis.

You also cannot take sanctions against one EU member like Ireland, you’d have to take on the whole EU and the consequences would be reciprocal and painful for the UK.

It’s a big export market for us, but it’s not our biggest. The US and Eurozone are bigger.

I find it incredible the way UK media outlets let these guys pluck illustrative figures out of thin air and go totally unchallenged.

Peregrinus

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

I never realised that car makers ran the EU. You learn something new every day.

You may not have realised it, but every Brexiter learns it at his mother's knee.

Professor Moriarty

EdgeCase wrote: »

Where does he get his figures on exports ?!
I find it odd that nobody in the UK media seems to have these figures at hand.

65% of Irish exports do not “end up in the UK” approximately 13.5% do.

It’s a big export market for us, but it’s not our biggest. The US and Eurozone are bigger.

Perhaps he means that 65% of Irish exports pass through the UK. SNIP.

Cut out the name calling please.

Professor Moriarty

Fair enough - apologies.

EdgeCase

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

Perhaps he means that 65% of Irish exports pass through the UK.

Which just means that UK logistics operators, ports and airports lose significant business.

Irish airfreight would just end up going more directly or via continental hubs like Amsterdam Schiphol, and you’ll get a lot more direct fright by sea to various continental ports.

If anything this is a big opportunity for Irish airports like Dublin, Cork and Shannon to grow direct freight connections elsewhere.

The consequences of the UK deliberately disrupting business for political reasons are dire for the UK, not for us. It’s going from a stable and business friendly location to one with serious regulatory challenges and chaotic politics, more like Russia.

Your business could be undermined at a whim due to jingosim, so why locate there?

Peregrinus

EdgeCase wrote: »

Which just means that UK logistics operators, ports and airports lose significant business.

Irish airfreight would just end up going more directly or via continental hubs like Amsterdam Schiphol, and you’ll get a lot more direct fright by sea to various continental ports.

If anything this is a big opportunity for Irish airports like Dublin, Cork and Shannon to grow direct freight connections elsewhere.

But it's also an expense for Irish exporters (and the consumers of imported products) since airfreight costs more, and sea routes avoiding the UK will cost more and/or invovle more delay. So, yeah, this damages us.

EdgeCase wrote: »

The consequences of the UK deliberately disrupting business for political reasons are dire for the UK, not for us. It’s going from a stable and business friendly location to one with serious regulatory challenges and chaotic politics, more like Russia.

They'd be dire for both of us, to be honest. I doubt that the UK will do this (in part for the reason you point out; the reputational damage they would inflict on themselves). But even the non-malicious disruptions caused by Brexit will be materially disadvantageous to us.

Professor Moriarty

EdgeCase wrote: »

Which just means that UK logistics operators, ports and airports lose significant business.

Irish airfreight would just end up going more directly or via continental hubs like Amsterdam Schiphol, and you’ll get a lot more direct fright by sea to various continental ports.

If anything this is a big opportunity for Irish airports like Dublin, Cork and Shannon to grow direct freight connections elsewhere.

And seaports in Wexford and Cork. That thought had occurred to me as well, that they would lose a lot of business by closing Ireland's routes through the UK or by making it difficult. I doubt if things will ever come to that, but if they did it might be a nettle that we would be glad to have grasped. In all of this, serious damage has already been done to UK trade with the EU. Many companies are shifting their focus away from the UK and will be very wary of committing to trade with the UK in the future lest the Eurosceptics gain power.

EdgeCase

I think the reputational damage is already inflicted, at least in part.

There’s just a benefit of the doubt afforded to the UK that I don’t think would be extended to many other countries. It’s because of the financial and media hub in London and an assumption that reality may eventually dawn and some kind of sanity may return to British politics.

If it doesn’t, I think the reputation as a business-friendly location is going to be in the toilet before long.

Bear in mind that UK policy impacting multinationals, including ones located here, is not something that will go without very negative consequences for the business friendly reputation the UK has enjoyed to-date.

You can keep saying “open Britain” and “business friendly” all you like, but if that’s just a smokescreen for undermining trade and political moves that damage businesses, well ... that’s your reputation becoming decidedly more like Russia or similar unstable regimes that politically interfer with trade and business.

At the end do the day, the uk hurting Irish or EU business = hurting major multinationals.

Changing regulations = undermining major multinational banks and financial institutions in London.

All of that counts towards making the UK less stable and less attractive as a place to invest.

Kermit.de.frog

UK Backstop proposal to be published today.

https://twitter.com/tnewtondunn/status/1004671906480644096


But EU has already rejected anything that does not apply to NI only.

Professor Moriarty

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

UK Backstop proposal to be published today.

https://twitter.com/tnewtondunn/status/1004671906480644096


But EU has already rejected anything that does not apply to NI only.

Exactly. The EU has already stated that this kind of fudge is unacceptable to them. It's really strange stuff. Obviously more about political careers and party than country. In fact, it's almost treasonous.

Kermit.de.frog

This is not over apparently.

ERG (Rees Mogg etc) demanding the UK's top civil servant dealing with Brexit resigns. They claim he is a remainer working against the UK.

https://twitter.com/bbclaurak/status/1004679241613619200

Sam Russell

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

This is not over apparently.

ERG (Rees Mogg etc) demanding the UK's top civil servant dealing with Brexit resigns. They claim he is a remainer working against the UK.

If DD has not resigned, then neither will anyone else. It is all a bottle of smoke.

Kermit.de.frog

Sam Russell wrote: »

If DD has not resigned, then neither will anyone else. It is all a bottle of smoke.

He could be going yet...

https://twitter.com/BBCNews/status/1004680659363942400


If the backstop does not include the absurd time limit (which the EU will reject anyway) the Brexiteers will go nuts. If DD does step down odds on others will go too.

Kermit.de.frog

https://twitter.com/PaulBrandITV/status/1004683841775308800

Indeed, he's ex SAS, remember

Water John

I presume if the 'problem' is not sorted, TM won't fly to G7 meeting. That is a deadline, in itself.
Some forms of words, hopefully by such and such a date etc. Some other fudge.
SAS? he bottled it by lunchtime the first day.

cml387

Could be a decisive moment.
Apparently media were briefed that a plan was in place after cabinet meeting.
Now it seems that there was no agreement.

An Ciarraioch

Laura Kuenssberg - DD to put statement out, not resigning, has been clarification in document on timing.

But of course, if there is a date in the document, Leo will immediately reject it.

Kermit.de.frog

There is a date on the backstop now apparently.

kunst nugget

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

https://twitter.com/PaulBrandITV/status/1004683841775308800

Indeed, he's ex SAS, remember

I know the regiment he was in was called the 21 SAS but it's part of the Territorial Army. Isn't that the same as the Free Clothes Association, or Reserves as they are called now, over here?

An Ciarraioch

She then confirms the updated document has a date.

Kermit.de.frog

This will not be acceptable to the EU. You can't have a "backstop" with a defined time limit...

Hurrache

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

There is a date on the backstop now apparently.

An Ciarraioch wrote: »

She then confirms the updated document has a date.

You'd have to wonder why they bothered with all the drama if it will likely be rejected anyway?

LeinsterDub

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

This will not be acceptable to the EU. You can't have a "backstop" with a defined time limit...

Well may be if it was the year 10,000. (Not much will have changed except they attempt to brexit under water)

EdgeCase

Hurrache wrote: »

You'd have to wonder why they bothered with all the drama if it will likely be rejected anyway?

Because they're more concerned about playing to the tabloids and the domestic audience than anything to do with reality?

Kermit.de.frog

Varadkar saying a time limit won't be accepted.

https://twitter.com/gavreilly/status/1004658943199760384

Zubeneschamali

Westminster still arguing amongst themselves, not addressing the EU at all.

An Ciarraioch

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

Varadkar saying a time limit won't be accepted.

https://twitter.com/gavreilly/status/1004658943199760384

And note that tweet was sent two hours before the latest farce.

Water John

So David has demanded, a proposal be sent to Brussells, that they know the EU will reject.
That seems plain enough.

LeinsterDub

https://twitter.com/tnewtondunn/status/1004693969064865792?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.theguardian.com%2Fpolitics%2Fblog%2Flive%2F2018%2Fjun%2F07%2Fformer-brexit-minister-says-mays-backstop-plan-extremely-damaging-for-britain-politics-live

It maybe possible for the EU to agree to this if they've are the one saying if enough has been done when 'expectation' time arrives

Kermit.de.frog

Water John wrote: »

So David has demanded, a proposal be sent to Brussells, that they know the EU will reject.
That seems plain enough.

Don't think it's as simple as that. Apparently the doc does not specify an actual date.

Seems like it will be a time limit that is not limited by time.

swampgas

It looks like DD wants to play chicken with the Irish government - I imagine he feels that if he plays hardball on the time limit, Ireland might back down, which is (he might imagine) the foot in the door he needs to get a special deal.

Time for Leo and Simon to hold their nerve, I think.

J Mysterio

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

https://twitter.com/PaulBrandITV/status/1004683841775308800

Indeed, he's ex SAS, remember

Who is that lunatic? So now the PM is 'bullying' her cabinet appointee. Utter madness breaking loose there.

An Ciarraioch

And the backstop has been published:

https://mobile.twitter.com/adamfleming/status/1004696585471713280

ArmaniJeanss

The final bit.

26. The UK is clear that the temporary customs arrangement, should it be needed, should be time limited, and that it will be only in place until the future customs arrangement can be introduced. The UK is clear that the future customs arrangement needs to deliver on the commitments made in relation to Northern Ireland. The UK expects the future arrangement to be in place by the end of December 2021 at the latest. There are a range of options for how a time limit could be delivered, which the UK will propose and discuss with the EU.

Christy42

So a suggestion of a time limit. There is no time limit on this. There is a we feel like there should be a limit and a we hope that this is the time limit but no actual time limit.

Bit of an absent minded pat on the head to keep Davis happy. I hope the rest of the SAS are made of sterner stuff!

Anthracite

I for one am astonished that this latest crisis ended in a meaningless fudge. Astonished, I tell you.

Water John

Its a very popular sweet around the UK Cabinet table.

cml387

"Diplomacy is about surviving to the next century
Politics is about surviving until Friday"
Sir Humphrey Appleby

At least it gets the PM off to the G7 while ministers twist on the head of a pin.

J Mysterio

ArmaniJeanss wrote: »

The final bit.

26. The UK is clear that the temporary customs arrangement, should it be needed, should be time limited, and that it will be only in place until the future customs arrangement can be introduced. The UK is clear that the future customs arrangement needs to deliver on the commitments made in relation to Northern Ireland. The UK expects the future arrangement to be in place by the end of December 2021 at the latest. There are a range of options for how a time limit could be delivered, which the UK will propose and discuss with the EU.

December 2021 - wasn't the cutoff off the transition agreement to be 2020?

Water John

Yes, first Transition, then Backstop, if no agreement.
A Backstop, by Definition has no time limit. If it has, it isn't a Backstop, as something comes after it.
That's my understanding of both, legal issues and the English language.

An Ciarraioch

Barnier literally gives a diplomatic response:

https://mobile.twitter.com/MichelBarnier/status/1004706411874541568

catrionanic

I am confused now. Is the UK still trying to propose that the backstop means the whole of the UK staying in the SM and CU until a technological (or other) solution is found? I thought the EU had made it clear that the backstop would only apply to NI, and that come December 2020, GB are out?

Dymo

This sentance

The UK will continue to apply the same rules as the EU, meaning that access to each other’s markets will continue on current terms.

And then this

The UK able to negotiate, sign and ratify free trade agreements (FTAs) with rest of world partners and implement those elements that do not affect the functioning of the temporary customs arrangement.

What if there new partners aren't up to EU standards?

Sam Russell

Dymo wrote: »

This sentance



And then this


What if there new partners aren't up to EU standards?

Well, if they mean what it says, (not always certain), then they can agree and sign only those agreements that are up to EU standards, otherwise they will not comply with the first bit -

The UK will continue to apply the same rules as the EU, meaning that access to each other’s markets will continue on current terms.

You cannot have your cake and it - I read somewhere.

J Mysterio

Water John wrote: »

Yes, first Transition, then Backstop, if no agreement.
A Backstop, by Definition has no time limit. If it has, it isn't a Backstop, as something comes after it.
That's my understanding of both, legal issues and the English language.

Yes. So it's a 'transition period', which is not really a transition period but is essentially just an extension of negotiations until 2021m by which time they are hoping they can magic up another trick. Then.... more transition to implement new magic solution?


EU should really tell them to go to hell. It's the originally agreed backstop, or hard Brexit. Seriously getting fed up of this sh1te at this stage.


The backstop was - in the first place - a backstop. It was third of three options, inserted at EU's insistence in the event that the UK could not propose a better solution, which the EU could not see. It's obvious that the UK doesnt have a better solution, despite all their bleating for so long. so now back to the backstop and fudge that too? It shouldn't be allowed. The UK made their bed, now they need to lie in it.

Thomas_IV

J Mysterio wrote: »

Yes. So it's a 'transition period', which is not really a transition period but is essentially just an extension of negotiations until 2021m by which time they are hoping they can magic up another trick. Then.... more transition to implement new magic solution?


EU should really tell them to go to hell. It's the originally agreed backstop, or hard Brexit. Seriously getting fed up of this sh1te at this stage.


The backstop was - in the first place - a backstop. It was third of three options, inserted at EU's insistence in the event that the UK could not propose a better solution, which the EU could not see. It's obvious that the UK doesnt have a better solution, despite all their bleating for so long. so now back to the backstop and fudge that too? It shouldn't be allowed. The UK made their bed, now they need to lie in it.

They are playing time to waste it and go for a hard Brexit to afterwards blame the EU for all of it. I am sure that the bigot Brexiters will even buy into this cheap propaganda too.

This article below is not Brexit linked but it sheds a light on the current problems in the retail sector of the UK and the loss of jobs this article is about might be just a taste for what might come when Brexit really kicks in and I have no doubt that a hard Brexit will hit the retail sector hard.

https://www.theguardian.com/business/2018/jun/07/house-of-fraser-to-close-more-than-half-of-its-british-stores

Here is a full list of jobs either lost or at risk and the numbers are not just in the hundred, but go into the thousands.

https://www.theguardian.com/business/2018/jun/07/high-street-woes-a-list-of-lost-shops-and-Jobs

Thomas_IV

J Mysterio wrote: »

December 2021 - wasn't the cutoff off the transition agreement to be 2020?

Yes, it is December 2020. With the prospect of a hard Brexit as the final result, it might not last that long anyway.

Professor Moriarty

An Ciarraioch wrote: »

Barnier literally gives a diplomatic response:

https://mobile.twitter.com/MichelBarnier/status/1004706411874541568

"Is it an all weather backstop?" There's the rub.