Brexit discussion thread III

Leroy42

And the same is true of goods that come from the UK to the EU isn't it? So the cost of goods will increase, whilst at the same time we will 'probably' see a fall off in sterling.

So whilst of course it will hurt the UK, at least it appears that the population has accepted that (at least in the short-term) I am not sure that the citizens of the EU will be as stoic.

I reckon this is the calculation that the UK is working off, I can't see any other logic to it. I whilst the EU is of course larger than the UK, the UK is by itself still a very important player in the global economy.

Gerry T

First Up wrote:

No they won't be "shut tight". The worst it will be is WTO terms. It will mean price increases and possibly some items not being widely available but "no deal" doesn't mean a trade embargo.

WTO gets mentioned as if the UK can just goto them, but I don't think it's that simple.
Under WTO don't you have to have a quota to trade, and at the moment the UK doesn't have any...plus it will need to agree it's tariffs schedule against those quotas again the UK doesn't have any. Finally WTO doesn't Cover financial passporting.
Unless I have that all wrong, has the UK explained, under a hard Brexit how in 12 mths time it will trade with ANYONE.

Secondly, the UK will be bargaining as a superpower of 50 odd million, with all that muscle, so the quotas, tariffs, free trade 😂 it will negioate will most obviously be far better than the current deals struck by the little 500 odd million EU.

Let's face it, the UK is totally dillusional and is setting up to wait for the EU to come crawling looking for a deal. No one is coming.

irishash

So Michael Gove today suggested (did not actually say) a ban on plastic straws for the UK. Also said (did not suggest) that brexit helps in this matter as been in the EU would mean they could not do this ban.

Source:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-43169004

He said that being in the EU meant there were "some steps we might want to take environmentally that we can't yet."

Gove was then helpfully reminded that the EU is currently well ahead of the UK in terms of actually having draft legislation drawn up for debate before the summer.

Source: https://twitter.com/TimmermansEU/status/966996904847532033?

Gove then shot back, with gusto, and said that the EU is a long way from a ban, that it actually was not a ban on straws and that the EU has a lot to do as the UK has already banned microbeads. In fact the UK are the first in Europe to do this.

So to sum up - Gove wants to ban plastic straws in the UK but has to wait for Brexit to happen as the nasty rotten EU won't let the UK legislate for that, even though the rotten horrible EU are already working on a ban, and the horrible ignorant EU are terrible as the UK have already banned microbeads which they could not have done as according to Gove the brutal digusting EU will not let the UK ban things for environmental good.

Do you think Gove will get called on any of his insane bulls**t by any media org? Davis, Fox, BoJo....they are just dumb, but this guy.....

steddyeddy

I work in the National Renewable Energy Lab on the plastic degradation problem. the EU is far far in advance of the Uk on proposals for legislation. Gove is lying to the public again.

Zubeneschamali

First Up wrote: »

No they won't be "shut tight". The worst it will be is WTO terms. It will mean price increases and possibly some items not being widely available but "no deal" doesn't mean a trade embargo.

Where are the giant truck parks? The customs staff? They'll be lucky to get 5% of todays traffic checked.

It would take years to transition to WTO terms, and they don't have years.

jobbridge4life

Leroy42 wrote: »

And the same is true of goods that come from the UK to the EU isn't it? So the cost of goods will increase, whilst at the same time we will 'probably' see a fall off in sterling.

So whilst of course it will hurt the UK, at least it appears that the population has accepted that (at least in the short-term) I am not sure that the citizens of the EU will be as stoic.

I reckon this is the calculation that the UK is working off, I can't see any other logic to it. I whilst the EU is of course larger than the UK, the UK is by itself still a very important player in the global economy.

I don't argee. The EU are not bluffing and they not merely trying to deal with the trade implications of Brexit. Fundamentally, any deal that is in anyway favourable to the UK would lead to disquiet across the Union and with those countries who already have extant outside relationships with the Union. The UK while an important player no doubt, is largely irrelevant in trade terms to a vast swathe of the Union as it stands today. The potential consequences of a 'better off out' solution for the UK, on public and political reactions across the Union and without are very real.

It is essential that the EU hold firm and force the UK into accepting a reasonable, mutually benefical relationship.

steddyeddy

Also by leaving the EU, Britain is cutting EU grant money towards plastic degradation and recycling research.

Skedaddle

I wouldn't pay much attention to Gove. He was claiming that leaving the EU would improve rural broadband the other day!

https://www.theregister.co.uk/2018/02/21/brexit_will_mean_better_broadband_and_4g_coverage_for_farmers_says_michael_gove/

(Great term: Bumpkin broadband)

All positives, hopes, dreams and aspirations to be credited to Brexit.

All negatives to be blamed on the EU.

irishash

Skedaddle wrote: »

I wouldn't pay much attention to Gove. He was claiming that leaving the EU would improve rural broadband the other day!

https://www.theregister.co.uk/2018/02/21/brexit_will_mean_better_broadband_and_4g_coverage_for_farmers_says_michael_gove/

(Great term: Bumpkin broadband)

All positives, hopes, dreams and aspirations to be credited to Brexit.

All negatives to be blamed on the EU.

He is a senior government minister with a large amount of responsability. When he speaks, a lot of people will implicitly believe whatever he says.

I understand your sentiment, but he needs to be pulled up on this crap. Just ignoring him allows him to continue with his crass dishonesty.

Skedaddle

Sure who's going to do that? The press is divided and one half foam at the mouth when anything anti EU is uttered. Other people think it's acceptable or even funny.

Trying to get clear communication on Brexit in the UK is basically impossible. It's a whirlpool of toxic half truths, lies, manipulated facts and pure propaganda.

At least the tech media is being appropriate sarcastic!

Zubeneschamali

irishash wrote: »

I understand your sentiment, but he needs to be pulled up on this crap. Just ignoring him allows him to continue with his crass dishonesty.

UK politicians lying to the UK electorate are no longer anyone's problem outside the UK.

murphaph

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

UK politicians lying to the UK electorate are no longer anyone's problem outside the UK.

It's our problem too unfortunately. We are very closely intertwined with the UK still. While we have to stand united with our EU 27 partners, we have the most to lose.

steddyeddy

it is definitely our problem too, but it's going to be our problem no matter what. Hard or soft Brexit will impact us. There's some areas we might be able to capitalize on, but they're niche areas.

Econ_

irishash wrote: »

He is a senior government minister with a large amount of responsability. When he speaks, a lot of people will implicitly believe whatever he says.

I understand your sentiment, but he needs to be pulled up on this crap. Just ignoring him allows him to continue with his crass dishonesty.

Pulling Gove up on plastic straw legislation won’t make a jot of difference to Gove’s reputation.

There are senior government politicians lying through their teeth in far more sinister ways and their default response is to ignore and attack Labour policies whenever there’s an attempt to hold them to account. UK politics is an absolute farce.

Nody

I lust love how the cake is being eaten in the UK and constantly remains; remember Brexit is about sovereignty and the right to write their own laws and this is how UK envision things to be in the future with EU:

Health Secretary Jeremy Hunt explained the position the UK Cabinet had come to on Brexit trade on BBC Radio 4 this morning. He said the UK wanted “frictionless trade” while also leaving the customs union.

He said there was a “central common understanding” that “there will be areas and sectors of industry where we agree to align our regulations with European regulations, such as the automotive industry”.

But he added: “But it will be on a voluntary basis, we will as a sovereign power have the right to choose to diverge, and what we won’t be doing is accepting changes in rules because the EU unilaterally chooses to make those changes.”

So to sum it up; EU does not have the right to change the laws but UK has not only the right to make up their own laws but also to veto any new EU laws. I'm sorry but WTF?! Do any UK politicians actually sit down and think through what they are saying any more? If we're going to go into lala land why not slap on that EU should pay UK 30 billion a year while we're at it?

Vronsky

Enzokk wrote: »

I am not fighting you on this point, the UK politicians seem to be. They want divergence from the EU but they have agreed to have the same regulations to ensure no barriers in NI, and due to the DUP, the UK. How do you realistically do that?

What happened at the Chequers Brexit awayday?

It's a rather meaningless point in reality. If the UK is in union with the EU customs union it is effectively in the EU customs union. Yes, it theoretically gains control that allows it to sign trade deals with other countries, but in reality it wouldn't be able to exercise that control since that would break the EU-UK customs union. It's what they over there call BINO.

It might be a political solution if May had a majority of pragmatic politicians, but she had 60 hard brexiteers who would see through that plan for what it is.

The only way something like that would pass was if Labour bailed her out.

Nitrogan

The strength in the UK's negotiating hand is that when it threatens economic armageddon it's the only credible prediction coming from them.

Capt'n Midnight

Skedaddle wrote: »

I wouldn't pay much attention to Gove. He was claiming that leaving the EU would improve rural broadband the other day!

Also taking back control of the seas, and then saying that the countries that do most of the fishing could continue to do since the UK fleet isn't up to it.

Also saying that UK would match EU farm funds, but only if farms were "environmental" - weasel words from a weasel.

Capt'n Midnight

Leroy42 wrote: »

On BBC QT last night an audience member restated that they (EU) need us more that we (UK) need them. Now we have seen the fallacy of that argument but it is true that a hard brexit will hit certain sections of the EU hard (Ireland for example). Will these areas be willing to pay the price for an ideal?

That is the UK gamble.

Sterling has fallen since. So less profits going back to to the EU. They are making their trump card less relevant. Productivity is increasing in the EU but not in the UK. This means UK goods and services are less competitive as time goes on.

And unless they get the services thing sorted the current balance of payments levels aren't sustainable.

For most goods the UK imports and exports are fairly close for the major categories
- apart from one off's like gold
- and the export of jet turbines matches the import of computers

Take the plight of EU immigrants in the UK. Are they willing for all of them to be illegal basically on 30th March? (unlikely to happen but its a stick to use).

Hasn't May announced another U-turn on this issue ?

Are the EU prepared to forego the possible 40bn in payments?

Like they said in Mad Max "Break a deal, spin the wheel" if the UK fails to meet it's obligations then broken trust will cost them an absolute bloody fortune in later trade deals.

Without the UK's Veto some EU costs will be lower, like blocking Chinese steel dumping, or UK influenced projects like accommodating Eastern countries or Turkey.

Tariffs on UK imports also generate revenue.

No EU 27 leader is going to lose the next election over Brexit. Responsibility has been delegated to the EU team. EU treaties mean the if the UK offers a special deal to Poland (say) then everyone gets the same deal. Even The Donald understood that after Merkel explained it a half dozen times.


Even here where our economy might get hit by up to 7% FG have high levels of support. - Someone should remind the Brexiteers that FF and SF would be way more hard line about a hard border than FG.

Inquitus

The government is set to pursue a policy which puts the UK outside a customs union with the EU - but matching EU rules in some industries in an attempt to achieve "frictionless trade".

http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-43175201

First time I have seen have your cake and eat it written that way! Doomed to failure!

flutered

Enzokk wrote: »

But they won't be in the Customs Union. They will be in a customs union. It will just be a coincidence that the regulations that the UK has with the (totally separate) customs union happens to be so close to the EU customs union that it allows for no barriers to trade. It will be a coincidence because the UK will make their own regulations (control).

It will be a fudge, nothing more or less. The UK will not get their own trade deals with countries that do not have trade deals with the EU because their regulations with their own customs union with the EU will preclude this.

That is my reading from the wording of the recent meeting of the cabinet and the fact that no-one resigned on the spot.

tusk is not happy with the uk's idea of a customs union
https://www.ft.com/content/dd2aa0d4-18c6-11e8-9376-4a6390addb44

Enzokk

Vronsky wrote: »

It's a rather meaningless point in reality. If the UK is in union with the EU customs union it is effectively in the EU customs union. Yes, it theoretically gains control that allows it to sign trade deals with other countries, but in reality it wouldn't be able to exercise that control since that would break the EU-UK customs union. It's what they over there call BINO.

It might be a political solution if May had a majority of pragmatic politicians, but she had 60 hard brexiteers who would see through that plan for what it is.

The only way something like that would pass was if Labour bailed her out.

I think that this is the Labour idea as well. There is still a substantial portion of the public that believe the UK must leave all of the EU. You cannot just advocate to overturn this decision if you haven't got the majority to make a decision that will make a lot of people unhappy. This goes as much for Labour as for Theresa May. She is now beholden to the referendum result and the DUP because she doesn't have a majority. I don't foresee Labout being able to politically go for a soft Brexit either. They will need some of those voters to get them in government, if they even believe in a soft Brexit.

flutered wrote: »

tusk is not happy with the uk's idea of a customs union
https://www.ft.com/content/dd2aa0d4-18c6-11e8-9376-4a6390addb44

The UK is just setting out its stall. I don't see how it could work without some sacrifices from the UK regarding those red lines, but at least it is an idea that the EU can discuss and reject and tell them why it is rejected. At least there is progress, even if we can see it will lead to nothing.

Capt'n Midnight

For those who claim that the UK will leave a big hole in EU spending, in reality it's just a fraction of 2% of government spending.

And the money comes back in shared benefits for the most.

Water John

I think the two main options being considered are, upping the VAT reclaim to the EU and simply printing the money.

Panrich

The whole saga is going round in circles. The EU consistently states that you are in the CU and SM or outside them. The UK consistently ignores this basic point and comes back with yet another version of their cake and eat it policy.

It beggars belief that there is no coherent plan that might work and get some backing emanating from Westminster. The worst part of this whole sorry saga is the effect it will have on us in this country through no fault of our own.

Inquitus

Panrich wrote: »

The whole saga is going round in circles. The EU consistently states that you are in the CU and SM or outside them. The UK consistently ignores this basic point and comes back with yet another version of their cake and eat it policy.

It beggars belief that there is no coherent plan that might work and get some backing emanating from Westminster. The worst part of this whole sorry saga is the effect it will have on us in this country through no fault of our own.

Labour seem to be coalescing around a Customs Union policy which means May won't have the votes to get anything else through, so that gives some hope a more common sense approach may prevail!

steddyeddy

Varadker and Donald Tusk both label Theresa May's strategy of eating cake "pure illusion".

Water John

That discussion that TM had, on the three baskets, should have taken place, before she activated Art 50. When did that happen?

Her speech scheduled for next Fri, may be outflanked by then and be largely irrevelant.

Sam Russell

Water John wrote: »

That discussion that TM had, on the three baskets, should have taken place, before she activated Art 50. When did that happen?

Her speech scheduled for next Fri, may be outflanked by then and be largely irrevelant.

I think it is obvious that the UK Gov is now a basket case.

Inquitus

Water John wrote: »

That discussion that TM had, on the three baskets, should have taken place, before she activated Art 50. When did that happen?

Her speech scheduled for next Fri, may be outflanked by then and be largely irrevelant.

Yep its total fantasy and has already been exposed as such, they are running out of time though, and have yet to come up with something realistic. Firms are signing leases and moving jobs, time has run out!

Charles Babbage

Vronsky wrote: »

It's a rather meaningless point in reality. If the UK is in union with the EU customs union it is effectively in the EU customs union. Yes, it theoretically gains control that allows it to sign trade deals with other countries, but in reality it wouldn't be able to exercise that control since that would break the EU-UK customs union. It's what they over there call BINO.

It might be a political solution if May had a majority of pragmatic politicians, but she had 60 hard brexiteers who would see through that plan for what it is.

The only way something like that would pass was if Labour bailed her out.

Labour seem to be moving in that direction and there are a fair few in the Conservatives who would support a reasonable Labour proposal.

steddyeddy

Charles Babbage wrote: »

Labour seem to be moving in that direction and there are a fair few in the Conservatives who would support a reasonable Labour proposal.

I don't know if you've been following the news in the UK, but according to some of the senior tories, Corbyn is a Cezch spy. That's how low the tories have sank. I think Corbyn's Brexit stance is weak but i have no time for the slander tories have been getting away with.

Skedaddle

I find it quite amusing how these UK ministers arrogantly go on air saying "we will do x, y and z" having agreed none of this with the EU.

Apart from the proposals being utterly daft, there's a frightening level or willful blindness and sheer arrogance coming across in this.

Simply rephrasing the last ridiculous proposal and inventing jargon like "managed divergence" isn't changing anything!

I'm seriously starting to wonder about the current political climate. You've absolutely insane policies coming out from both the UK and the USA. There's a whole new level of stupid at the moment. It's really unprecedented.

J Mysterio

It's a really scary world right now. I'm really thankful I live in Ireland and am an EU citizen.

flatty

LeinsterDub wrote: »

Enzokk wrote: »

But their cake would be that they can then negotiate their own trade deals in the process.

This absolutely impossible you can't be in Custom Union while not being in Customs Union.

You can't having the EU saying to China no dumping of steal , the UK saying ok but wink wink sell really dump it on the EU via the CU.

As I understand it, at the risk of getting banned again, this would be got around by gymnastics. The UK would "allow" the eu to piggyback onto any of the myriad new trade deals that they struck. It would be a win win. *

*according to the UK.

flatty

LeinsterDub wrote: »

Enzokk wrote: »

But their cake would be that they can then negotiate their own trade deals in the process.

This absolutely impossible you can't be in Custom Union while not being in Customs Union.

You can't having the EU saying to China no dumping of steal , the UK saying ok but wink wink sell really dump it on the EU via the CU.

As I understand it, at the risk of getting banned again, this would be got around by gymnastics. The UK would "allow" the eu to piggyback onto any of the myriad new trade deals that they struck. It would be a win win. *

*according to the UK.

Econ_

The UK’s three basket approach is being referred to as ‘advanced cake theory’ in Brussels :pac:

Skedaddle

And now Trump is planning to send a special envoy to Northern Ireland to help resolve the empass.

While it would be a positive move in normal US presidency, you could end up with some hard right envoy who would make the DUP look like a bunch of open minded hippies.

It's like every step towards Brexit just enhances this perfect storm.

Nody

Skedaddle wrote: »

And now Trump is planning to send a special envoy to Northern Ireland to help resolve the empass.

Well seeing how well his son in law is doing in the Palestinian conflict I'd be inclined to say the right route would be to deny the envoy entry to Ireland (since we know May will do what ever her cabinet tells her anyway and they are all in love with the idea of an American FTA at any cost) as a proactive action to avoid escalation. Then again based on Trump's selection of people the envoy is just as likely to end up going to Italy instead without knowing the difference.

Skedaddle

It's worrying as you've a combination of a UK government desperate to jump on the Trump bandwagon to get a FTA and a society in NI which is every bit as divided as the US right now and across some of the same issues - eg political opposition to LGBT rights and it has all the same elements of religious fundamentalism in an aspect of its politics.

I just hope that Brexit doesn't throw NI into absolute chaos. It's a very complex and fragile set of very intricatly woven arrangements that led to the status quo and it appears to be unravelling, or rather it's being picked apart by dangerous idiots.

Enzokk

Skedaddle wrote: »

It's worrying as you've a combination of a UK government desperate to jump on the Trump bandwagon to get a FTA and a society in NI which is every bit as divided as the US right now and across some of the same issues - eg political opposition to LGBT rights and it has all the same elements of religious fundamentalism in an aspect of its politics.

I just hope that Brexit doesn't throw NI into absolute chaos. It's a very complex and fragile set of very intricatly woven arrangements that led to the status quo and it appears to be unravelling, or rather it's being picked apart by dangerous idiots.

While the reasons for the current situation was precipitated by Brexit, the reason why, I think, the current situation in NI is so fraught is because Theresa May has allowed the DUP into an extremely powerful position. One of the things the UK government had to do was to stay neutral, but they threw that one responsibility in front of the bus and got married to the DUP to stay in power.

The DUP has no reason to work to forming a new government in Stormont as they have the ear of the UK government. Direct rule is what they want or can tolerate. Basically they can say, 'give us what we want in NI or we will force another election. We have just as much to lose as you do but we are willing to burn down our house where you have shown yourself to be weak.'

A desperate situation that is being overseen by some of the most incompetent politicians we have seen for a while.

Water John

Arlene Foster is in the same pickle as TM. Foster was possibly not in favour of Brexit, given her rural and border constituency. She wanted the Executive running again in NI but has been undermined, within her own party, on both issues.
Woeful shorttermism.

Skedaddle

She's only the party leader and her constituency is unusual. The DUP's core support is almost entirely in the NE of Northern Ireland and in the greater Belfast area. While she may have a much more diverse and inclusive constituency herself, her party most certainly does not. The geographical split in NI politics is very stark.

The more you get into other regions where DUP is popular the further you get from the border and the more Brexity things start to get.

44.2% of Northern Ireland did actually vote to leave the EU, and that's almost entirely from DUP areas. Foster's constituency is a stark exception.

CelticRambler

Enzokk wrote: »

One of the things the UK government had to do was to stay neutral, but they threw that one responsibility in front of the bus and got married to the DUP to stay in power.

Almost an exact parallel of what the Trump administration has done in Israel re the Jerusalem question. At this stage, the UK and the US are in such close alignment on so many matters, I'm half expecting Trump's envoy to say the solution to the NI deadlock is to build a wall on the border and give guns to the politicians trapped behind it ... :rolleyes:

More realisitcally, though, the more TM's cabinet and party heads down the road towards its own civil war, the less important are the handful of DUP votes, and the less important they become, the easier it will be to achieve a half-baked cake, with special status and an Irish Sea border for NI getting rid of one major obstacle to agreeing a deal with the EU.

Water John

If the Chukuma/Soubury CU vote was carried. There power would be largely gone.

Skedaddle

I still strongly and stably predict the UK government will collapse long before March 2019. Things are just getting far too crazy.

The Fixed Term Parliaments Act makes dissolving it slightly more complicated but it's still not that difficult.

They just need a vote of no confidence and then 14 days of being unable to form a new government and there's a general election.

Or, if a new party or temporary flag of convenience centre alliance emerged, they could when do it without a general election under the FTP Act.

The big issue over there is no real alternative leader is emerging. I remain very unconvinced by Corbyn. Someone needs to bring the fight to the Brexiteers and that's not yet happening.

Whatever happens it'll be very messy but I have my doubts that the current idiocracy is going to be able to continue. Credibility is running out.

I think you'll start to see significant economic consequences as companies are forced to make investment decisions ahead of 2019. That's going to be visible really from Q2 2018 which is almost upon us.

Reality has to crystallise eventually. It's just likely to be one of those ugly, smelly, painful crystals you find in kidney stones rather than a diamond.

Tropheus

MPs that oppose Brexit are very reluctant to go against "the will of the people". The right wing press is just waiting for them to pop their heads above the parapet. We've seen several "Traitor" headlines recently.

There's also no clear picture of how public opinion has swayed. If the referendum was run again tomorrow, it's possible that remain would win by a narrow margin which doesn't really change the situation.

Companies moving from the UK will be labelled traitors of Brexit Britain while the EU will continue to be labelled as a bully for defending the position of its 27 member states.

The adults won't be taking over any time soon.

Enzokk

Enzokk wrote: »

While the reasons for the current situation was precipitated by Brexit, the reason why, I think, the current situation in NI is so fraught is because Theresa May has allowed the DUP into an extremely powerful position. One of the things the UK government had to do was to stay neutral, but they threw that one responsibility in front of the bus and got married to the DUP to stay in power..

Since when did the UK government have to be neutral?

In what way are they not being neutral at the moment, they are leaving the two parties in the north to get on and **** things up entirely on their own.

murphaph

Aegir wrote: »

Since when did the UK government have to be neutral?

In what way are they not being neutral at the moment, they are leaving the two parties in the north to get on and **** things up entirely on their own.

The government can't act as an honest broker when it is only in government because one side in NI keeps it there.

Enzokk

Aegir wrote: »

Since when did the UK government have to be neutral?

In what way are they not being neutral at the moment, they are leaving the two parties in the north to get on and **** things up entirely on their own.

Since they have to remain rigorously impartial when it comes to negotiations between the parties in Northern Ireland. I cannot see how they can remain impartial when they are in a supply and confidence agreement with one of those parties to remain in power in Westminster.

I mean how much push could they reasonably give to the DUP to form a government at Stormont? Was there anything they could say to the DUP that will motivate them to get an agreement with Sinn Fein? You may just think they could have, but seeing as Theresa May got owned twice already by the DUP I think I know who has the power when there has been negotiations between the Conservatives and the DUP.