Brexit discussion thread III

briany

Skedaddle wrote: »

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

The Conservatives have a saving grace in their grasp on power in that it's not just their party that is toxic, but their position. I believe that Labour would be happy to remain in the opposition for now and therefore have no appetite for a GE.

jobbridge4life

Tropheus wrote: »

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.

So opinion on the question of whether there should be a 'Brexit' or not has swayed to degree but surely the more pertinent question is what is public opinion on what constitutes 'Brexit'? Red, white and blue... soft or hard... full English... etc.

Leroy42

I actually think it is even more basic than that.
Does the UK want to play an active role in the current globalised world or retreat back into itself.

Because it is clear that whether it is the EU, the US, TPTT, commonwealth or whatever, to maintain the current position in the world the UK is going have to join something. And with that will come standards and regulations and immigration for access. It isn't really about being in or out if the EU, but rather out of the EU and into something else.

They need to disabuse themselves of this notion that they are somehow going to stride the world getting totally one sided trade deals with no implications or obligations required

trellheim

I actually think it is even more basic than that.
Does the UK want to play an active role in the current globalised world or retreat back into itself.

Because it is clear that whether it is the EU, the US, TPTT, commonwealth or whatever, to maintain the current position in the world the UK is going have to join something. And with that will come standards and regulations and immigration for access. It isn't really about being in or out if the EU, but rather out of the EU and into something else.

They need to disabuse themselves of this notion that they are somehow going to stride the world getting totally one sided trade deals with no implications or obligations required

They will remain in NATO.


I had a thought today that there may be a strategy to delay and delay so that the only possible answer is transition that lasts indefinitely ( the fun lies in the opt-out clauses the EU lets them away with especially if money is put into the budget , watch this space

Capt'n Midnight

trellheim wrote: »

I had a thought today that there may be a strategy to delay and delay so that the only possible answer is transition that lasts indefinitely ( the fun lies in the opt-out clauses the EU lets them away with especially if money is put into the budget , watch this space

Kick the can,

very familiar in NI politics


But the problem is that if there isn't the guts of a deal by the deadline then Article 50 kicks in unless ALL of the EU agrees to an extension.

Econ_

I’m just thinking here, besides the fact that the EU won’t accept the three baskets approach, I don’t see how it could possibly work anyway.

For instance, the Chemical industry is intrinsicly intertwined with the manufacturing industry. Most industries are intertwined with with many other industries.

It’s like trying to separate an egg from an omelette; as well as being close to impossible, it’s pretty damn stupid.

J Mysterio

So the UK cabinet agreed a 'three baskets' approach. They hope to judge existing laws individually and decide what to keep; what to change (different process, 'same outcome'), and what to ignore completely. So.. maybe it's less 'three baskets' and more 'one basket for cherry picking'.

The UK seem to think people should be impressed by the fact their cabinet were able to agree on something, or anything at all! It took them 8 hours at Chequers to agree this. After two years of this disastrous, mismanaged horror show, the 'War Cabinet' spend 8 hours to agree an approach that was ruled out by the EU 2 years ago. Even then there is no detail with it, the three baskets are full of more noncommital hot air.

If this is the UK position at this stage - after another crisis meeting - it just doesn't look good for the prospects of making any progress whatsoever in negotiations as (a) the UK havent actually identified what laws they want to keep/ change/ignore and, (b) the EU could not accept this cherry picking anyway, even if they had.

That said, it could have actually been helpful for the UK to outline what they actually want to keep/ change/ ignore but that would have been too difficult to talk about for 'make me an offer' May and the '(Civil) War Cabinet' effectively make a decision to make other decisions later.

murphaph

It's all down to the Tory rebels to save their country from the abyss now. Labour have moved enough towards soft Brexit.

listermint

Well we should be see clear examples of business exodus at this point. It's not salvageable from what I can tell. This has to be a clear example of no interest to fix it

Enzokk

murphaph wrote: »

It's all down to the Tory rebels to save their country from the abyss now. Labour have moved enough towards soft Brexit.

On Andrew Marr this morning he made a good point. Theresa May could tie the vote that the Tory rebels want to have to a no-confidence vote in the government. They will then have to decide, go ahead with the vote or risk losing their seats in government. Politics...right?

Capt'n Midnight

Enzokk wrote: »

On Andrew Marr this morning he made a good point. Theresa May could tie the vote that the Tory rebels want to have to a no-confidence vote in the government. They will then have to decide, go ahead with the vote or risk losing their seats in government. Politics...right?

How many are in safe seats ?

Here we have the farce of Independent FF where someone is expelled from the party but isn't.

Water John

Not sure if TM is up, for playing chicken, at this point. She got very burned, the last time she took a gamble an called the GE.
Just about time for some to put country before party and their own seats. Have a feeling Soubry and rebels have decided, the die is cast.

Water John

This is big news. Starmer confirms LB want the UK to stay in the CU!!!


TM big speech next Fri, is now waffle. Time for the Tory pro EU brigade to step up, to the plate.

VeryOwl

I wouldn't get too excited. Corbyn still seems happy to parrot Johnson's lie that the UK will get money back after Brexit, and will be leaving the Single Market.

CU doesn't solve the Irish border problem either.

Jeremy Corbyn will promise to pump more than £8billion-a-year of Brexit savings into jobs and public services.

In a speech on Labour’s Brexit position, he will say of the Tories: “Labour stands for a different future.

“We will use funds returned from Brussels after Brexit to invest in our public services and jobs of the future, not tax cuts for the richest.”

Link

Angry bird

Both Tory and Labour proposals will get short shrift, followed by another week of bleating and complaining about the big bad EU not letting us leave...undemocratic...bullying...bureaucrats etc. And the UK media will lap it up as usual. The EU should call a halt to the shambles to try and get them to focus on reality, not Brexit fantasies.

Sam Russell

VeryOwl wrote: »

I wouldn't get too excited. Corbyn still seems happy to parrot Johnson's lie that the UK will get money back after Brexit, and will be leaving the Single Market.

CU doesn't solve the Irish border problem either.



Link

There will be no spare money back from Europe.

The cost of duplicating the work of the 'faceless bureaucrats in Brussels' will be at least as much as they currently pay the EU. They have already spent over £1 billion on the dept for exiting the EU, for which nothing has been gained. They will either pay UK Civil Servants or the EU for the work done by the various agencies like the EMA and the EBA (which were housed in the UK) which cost a lot. That does not include the thousands of Customs and Excise staff required to man the various border posts, nor the cost of those border posts, nor the lost productivity caused by the delays at those border posts.

When will they wake up to the fact that leaving the EU is a daft idea if it is to get a better deal elsewhere.

First Up

Sam Russell wrote: »

VeryOwl wrote: »

I wouldn't get too excited. Corbyn still seems happy to parrot Johnson's lie that the UK will get money back after Brexit, and will be leaving the Single Market.

CU doesn't solve the Irish border problem either.



Link

There will be no spare money back from Europe.

The cost of duplicating the work of the 'faceless bureaucrats in Brussels' will be at least as much as they currently pay the EU. They have already spent over £1 billion on the dept for exiting the EU, for which nothing has been gained. They will either pay UK Civil Servants or the EU for the work done by the various agencies like the EMA and the EBA (which were housed in the UK) which cost a lot. That does not include the thousands of Customs and Excise staff required to man the various border posts, nor the cost of those border posts, nor the lost productivity caused by the delays at those border posts.

When will they wake up to the fact that leaving the EU is a daft idea if it is to get a better deal elsewhere.

Plus they are frantically trying to recruit experienced trade negotiators - trying to lure them from their jobs with the EU and from as far afield as New Zealand. Very attractive (ie expensive) packages on offer, including to people who retired years ago.

Capt'n Midnight

Sam Russell wrote: »

That does not include the thousands of Customs and Excise staff required to man the various border posts, nor the cost of those border posts, nor the lost productivity caused by the delays at those border posts.

There's also the slight problem that the existing customs software upgrade project isn't on the happy path.

Also there's the factor there's no specs for a new system because there still isn't even the semblance of a deal. Historically software mega projects have a very poor rep for being on time, on budget, or even delivering what was planned. Lots of outsourcing isn't going to help either.

https://www.theregister.co.uk/2018/01/09/mps_sceptical_over_plan_for_it_post_customs_union/

The Public Accounts Committee has already cast serious doubts on post-Brexit IT underpinning borders, agriculture and HMRC's Customs Declaration Service, which will replace the Customs Handling of Import and Export Freight (CHIEF) system.

https://www.theregister.co.uk/2017/09/15/just_how_are_hmrcs_it_systems_going_to_cope_with_brexit/

"Unprecedented challenge" was the phrase which kept being repeated in a recent Treasury Select Committee hearing regarding Brexit, the customs union and HMRC.

The department is already undergoing the “largest transformational change in Europe,” with plans to digitise the tax system, while simultaneously untying itself from the £800m per-yer mega IT contract. And that’s before Brexit.

The UK Army recruits about 8,000 a year. An IT system for hiring people isn't rocket science. It's bread and butter IT development , slap a front end on a simple database and that's pretty much it.

This comment really explains the IT problems Brexit will cause. Its too big and important to fail , so it will probably be given to the same incompetent minimum wage vendor that have a track record in screwing stuff up. https://forums.theregister.co.uk/forum/1/2018/01/17/government_it_outsourcing/

Look at Crapita's £1.3 billion pound military recruitment system. Ignoring the fact that the bunglers haven't made it work properly, the functionality of a recruitment system is simple transaction processing.

http://www.eastlothiancourier.com/news/national/15885068.Defence_recruitment_contract_fails_to_deliver_more_than___100_million_in_savings/

The £1.3 billion contract with the outsourcing giant has resulted in just £2.73 million of savings in its first six years, according to figures released to Parliament.

briany

If the status of Northern Ireland changes, it is going to p*ss off one side or the other. If it's a land border, it'll be the Nationalists annoyed, and if it's a sea border, then it'll be the Unionists. I know this isn't deep political insight here, but the point is that as much as the EU can charge Brexiteers with wanting to appease the Unionists and disrupt peace in that way, Britain can charge the EU with wanting to appease Ireland and the Irish. I suppose a mildly positive outcome of all this has been to show were the alliances truly stand, but there can be no Brexit that is satisfactory to all.

Leroy42

The flaw in that argument is that it is the UK that are forcing this. EU are more than happy to continue on as currently, the problem is that the UK have decided that having to agree with other countries on standards and letting foreigners live and work in their country is a price not worth paying for the ease of business.

It is the UK's line that the EU must work with them, but not really. UK have decided to leave them but still wants the benefits but has not come up with anything to entice the EU to go with that.

trellheim

Of course they have - Budget ...

With the EU budget up for renewal the pricey CAP and everything is up for discussion .


A country ( the UK ) banging a bag of change saying "give us a deal and we'll see you right" will be taken care of don't you worry lol thats very powerful leverage especially with Albania etc wanting in next so the cash has to come from somewhere, Ireland and the other 26 wont want to pony up

Sam Russell

trellheim wrote: »

Of course they have - Budget ...

With the EU budget up for renewal the pricey CAP and everything is up for discussion .


A country ( the UK ) banging a bag of change saying "give us a deal and we'll see you right" will be taken care of don't you worry lol thats very powerful leverage especially with Albania etc wanting in next so the cash has to come from somewhere, Ireland and the other 26 wont want to pony up

Leo has already said we would pay more but more must be done by the EU, and other countries will live with less or pay more. The whole EU budget is only 1.1% of Gov spending on average, so not that big an issue.

The UK is already factored in to every member state frame of mind - so the EU problems have moved on. Migration, Russia, US/Trump, The rise of the Right wing - Poland, Hungary, Austria, the Budget.

But the UK - nah.

trellheim

The whole EU budget is only 1.1% of Gov spending on average, so not that big an issue

Agreed - but if you watch what Juncker and Mogherini are banging on about this week (enlargement of budget) and last . My point is rather that the UK will look like a very appetizing money deal to strike their own bargains in the transition period ( that type of concession )

The French farmers ( i.e. CAP ) will need their share and the Germans wont fund it this time round, so the bowl has to be filled somehow

trellheim

trellheim wrote: »

The French farmers ( i.e. CAP ) will need their share and the Germans wont fund it this time round, so the bowl has to be filled somehow

Surely the UK rebate removed that from the equation decades ago. The difference will be in everything other than agriculture.

Sam Russell

trellheim wrote: »

Agreed - but if you watch what Juncker and Mogherini are banging on about this week (enlargement of budget) and last . My point is rather that the UK will look like a very appetizing money deal to strike their own bargains in the transition period ( that type of concession )

The French farmers ( i.e. CAP ) will need their share and the Germans wont fund it this time round, so the bowl has to be filled somehow

No they wont. The UK has been written out - they have agreed to pay until 2020, and if they do not, they will starve because a No-Deal means nothing moves into or out of the UK. There will be no cake, and none to eat. The UK commitment is already done deal - it is no longer in play.

The 'enlarged' budget is more of the 'more Europe' from those two who always see it as a solution to everything.

Germany, Austria, Denmark, NL, and Finland all want to limit the budget, and in particular their share of it.

trellheim

I think it is the post-2020 is what matters here - something has to fund that expansion . Its not a zero sum game.

First Up

Sam Russell wrote: »

No they wont. The UK has been written out - they have agreed to pay until 2020, and if they do not, they will starve because a No-Deal means nothing moves into or out of the UK. There will be no cake, and none to eat. The UK commitment is already done deal - it is no longer in play.

I don't know how often this needs to be said but "no deal" DOES NOT mean that nothing moves in or out of the UK.

They may be hit with tarrifs or quotas and border delays would screw up many supply chains to the point of inoperability but there won't be an embargo on trade either. Worst case scenario is WTO terms - vastly inferior to SM membership and the death knell for many UK companies but not a blockade.

Water John

I'd say the EU will manage to restructure their income and expenditure.The problems are within the UK. It's of, the emperor has no clothes, scale.

Nody

trellheim wrote: »

I think it is the post-2020 is what matters here - something has to fund that expansion . Its not a zero sum game.

And UK was one of the bigger pushing parties for the expansion; that will now slow down instead with more focus on what's already there to drive further benefits and how to control immigration. EU wants to end it at 2020 exactly because UK will no longer be funding things and hence plan a budget without any money from the UK in the first place.

Tangatagamadda Chaddabinga Bonga Bungo

I think a hard border will be attacked in a nasty way. So everything should be done to avoid it.

Hurrache

Good article by Fintan O'Toole outlining the conflicts and ignorance on the GFA and what was agreed in the first phase of talks.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/feb/25/brexit-vision-england-perfidy-over-ireland-good-friday-agreemnt

Tangatagamadda Chaddabinga Bonga Bungo

Hurrache wrote: »

Good article by Fintan O'Toole outlining the conflicts and ignorance on the GFA and what was agreed in the first phase of talks.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/feb/25/brexit-vision-england-perfidy-over-ireland-good-friday-agreemnt

I disagree with Fintan O Toole a heck of a lot. But he is always logical in his thoughts.

This really shows him.

He makes great points throughout that in fairness.

He's clearly not a massive Republican.

The Good Friday Agreement not meaning anything to some DUP is really messed up. They are really bad people.

Hurrache

DUP weren't involved in drawing up the GFA in the first place so they probably see themselves as having no skin in that particular level of the game.

Leonard Hofstadter

Hurrache wrote: »

DUP weren't involved in drawing up the GFA in the first place so they probably see themselves as having no skin in that particular level of the game.

They also hold the balance of power in Westminster so have absolutely no incentive to get Stormont up and running. That and their general pettiness, vindictiveness and nastiness, they really are a different breed to anyone else in Ireland or the UK.

Capt'n Midnight

trellheim wrote: »

Of course they have - Budget ...

With the EU budget up for renewal the pricey CAP and everything is up for discussion .


A country ( the UK ) banging a bag of change saying "give us a deal and we'll see you right" will be taken care of don't you worry lol thats very powerful leverage especially with Albania etc wanting in next so the cash has to come from somewhere, Ireland and the other 26 wont want to pony up

Ireland and the other northern countries who are nett contributors have already agreed to pay some more.

Yes they have reservations and yes fiscal rectitude and yes there will be cutbacks, but at the end of the day it's accepted that the UK shortfall will be missed but the show must go on.

Also the entire EU budget is about 2% of average government spending within the EU. While extra costs are never welcomed it's not a biggie.

Capt'n Midnight

Some talk about Tory rebels and Labour winning a vote, if they had SF help to keep the UK in the CU.

Completely missing the point. SF are playing for a united Ireland. I can't see them voting in Westminster yet for anything else. If they let Brexit screw up NI then winning a border poll is more likely.

joeysoap

We were net receivers for many years, and now we are net contributors. Surely some of the other net receivers are going to move into net contributor status in the next few years? Or perhaps become as close to no difference to not receiving - not contributing?

Skedaddle

The aim was always that the system all eventually balances out and by allowing countries to catch up and grow, you create a much wealthier, most secure, stable Europe. Ultimately that actually means more places to sell out goods and services and the track record has been rapid economic development of countries that have taken part.

The EU startered out largely from the ashes of WWII and the huge Marshall plan. If you go back a few decades, all EU members were net receivers at some stage.

There's not one of them who can really be cocky about it. The UK also conveniently forgets the chaos of the 1970s seeing it end up needing an IMF bailout.

Economies can go down as well as up!
It's one thing really hate about the British tabloid media. They are always the first to attack and kick a neighbour when it's down.

For example, it was the British tabloids and London based financial media who coined terms like PIGS for the countries hit by the economic crisis who had to enter bailout programmes. That bled over somewhat into German media but, not nearly as dramatically as it was reported from the UK.

You may as well not be in the EU if you can't show any solidarity to your neighbours and friends. It's a lot more than just a purely economic trade bloc and I think that's where either it's been grossly miscommunicated and misrepresented in the UK or, they really have no solidarity with the rest of Europe at all.

I tend to think think it's the former more than the later.

It's like the country is allowing itself to be driven into political positions by the school bully.

joeysoap

Skedaddle wrote: »

The aim was always that the system all eventually balances out and by allowing countries to catch up and grow, you create a much wealthier, most secure, stable Europe........

As more countries catch up and grow in the EU, does it not follow that the EU budget will reduce or that more countries will contribute ( thus making up the UK shortfall in the event of a hard Brexit.) In the event of a Norway ++ agreement I suspect UK will be asked to contribute.

Skedaddle wrote: »

Economies can go down as well as up!

Accepted

Skedaddle

It's unlikely the budget reduces but the ability to funds it increases, reducing the burden as members' economies expand.

The way the EU works is by benchmarking against EU averages for deciding where needs funds. There are always relatively underperforming regions, including in wealthy countries. The key is "relatively".

Peregrinus

joeysoap wrote: »

We were net receivers for many years, and now we are net contributors. Surely some of the other net receivers are going to move into net contributor status in the next few years? Or perhaps become as close to no difference to not receiving - not contributing?

As of 2015, the net contributors to the EU budget, in descending order by amount of contribution:

- Germany
- The UK
- France
- Italy
- The Netherlands
- Denmark
- Austria
- Finland

Ireland, Croatia, Cyprus and Malta are more or less line-ball.

Everyone else is a recipient, although many by relatively modest amounts. The big recipients, starting with the one that gets most, are:

- Poland
- Greece
- Hungary
- Romania
- Portugal
- The Czech Republic

Peregrinus

trellheim wrote: »

Of course they have - Budget ...

With the EU budget up for renewal the pricey CAP and everything is up for discussion .


A country ( the UK ) banging a bag of change saying "give us a deal and we'll see you right" will be taken care of don't you worry lol thats very powerful leverage especially with Albania etc wanting in next so the cash has to come from somewhere, Ireland and the other 26 wont want to pony up

I can't see post-Brexit UK being keen to pay more money to the EU for less rights than the currently enjoy, somehow.

Peregrinus

VeryOwl wrote: »

I wouldn't get too excited. Corbyn still seems happy to parrot Johnson's lie that the UK will get money back after Brexit, and will be leaving the Single Market.

CU doesn't solve the Irish border problem either.



Link

The issue is not really whether CU solves the Irish border problem (you are correct; it doesn't) or whether the UK in the CU but not in the SM has a rosy future. The issue is whether the Tory government will lose the support of Parliament over this issue.

Tangatagamadda Chaddabinga Bonga Bungo

Skedaddle wrote: »

The aim was always that the system all eventually balances out and by allowing countries to catch up and grow, you create a much wealthier, most secure, stable Europe. Ultimately that actually means more places to sell out goods and services and the track record has been rapid economic development of countries that have taken part.

The EU startered out largely from the ashes of WWII and the huge Marshall plan. If you go back a few decades, all EU members were net receivers at some stage.

There's not one of them who can really be cocky about it. The UK also conveniently forgets the chaos of the 1970s seeing it end up needing an IMF bailout.

Economies can go down as well as up!
It's one thing really hate about the British tabloid media. They are always the first to attack and kick a neighbour when it's down.

For example, it was the British tabloids and London based financial media who coined terms like PIGS for the countries hit by the economic crisis who had to enter bailout programmes. That bled over somewhat into German media but, not nearly as dramatically as it was reported from the UK.

You may as well not be in the EU if you can't show any solidarity to your neighbours and friends. It's a lot more than just a purely economic trade bloc and I think that's where either it's been grossly miscommunicated and misrepresented in the UK or, they really have no solidarity with the rest of Europe at all.

I tend to think think it's the former more than the later.

It's like the country is allowing itself to be driven into political positions by the school bully.

Really good points there.

Think there isn't just an economic argument to be made as well though. There is a strong element of defense capability that is essential. Even if/when the UK leaves Europe it still needs its nuclear deterrent and military capabilities. Only France will be left with nukes in the EU.
Europe being solidified keeps Russia at bay, the ever rising Chinese back, India, Africa or Arabic forces in check.
We all live a relatively cosy life here in Ireland, but I'm under no illusion that it is largely because of Europe being a strong and united block.

judeboy101

Tangatagamadda Chaddabinga Bonga Bungo wrote: »

Skedaddle wrote: »

The aim was always that the system all eventually balances out and by allowing countries to catch up and grow, you create a much wealthier, most secure, stable Europe. Ultimately that actually means more places to sell out goods and services and the track record has been rapid economic development of countries that have taken part.

The EU startered out largely from the ashes of WWII and the huge Marshall plan. If you go back a few decades, all EU members were net receivers at some stage.

There's not one of them who can really be cocky about it. The UK also conveniently forgets the chaos of the 1970s seeing it end up needing an IMF bailout.

Economies can go down as well as up!
It's one thing really hate about the British tabloid media. They are always the first to attack and kick a neighbour when it's down.

For example, it was the British tabloids and London based financial media who coined terms like PIGS for the countries hit by the economic crisis who had to enter bailout programmes. That bled over somewhat into German media but, not nearly as dramatically as it was reported from the UK.

You may as well not be in the EU if you can't show any solidarity to your neighbours and friends. It's a lot more than just a purely economic trade bloc and I think that's where either it's been grossly miscommunicated and misrepresented in the UK or, they really have no solidarity with the rest of Europe at all.

I tend to think think it's the former more than the later.

It's like the country is allowing itself to be driven into political positions by the school bully.

Really good points there.

Think there isn't just an economic argument to be made as well though. There is a strong element of defense capability that is essential. Even if/when the UK leaves Europe it still needs its nuclear deterrent and military capabilities. Only France will be left with nukes in the EU.
Europe being solidified keeps Russia at bay, the ever rising Chinese back, India, Africa or Arabic forces in check.
We all live a relatively cosy life here in Ireland, but I'm under no illusion that it is largely because of Europe being a strong and united block.

I can see massive destabilization and stagnation in China over the long-term as a result of the removal of the two term limit

Skedaddle

According to reports this morning, it looks like the EU is going to apply absolute logic as treat the NI border issue with the Republic as an EU issue and whatever the UK has promised the DUP on having absolutely no special status for NI as an internal UK political issue that's nothing to do with the EU.

So basically, it's looking like the EU is going to work for its 27 remaining members and not 3rd countries. It is entirely unsurprising and just shows that thay the UK still seems to think that despite leaving the EU and accusing it of being worse than the Star Trek Borg, that it should still somehow treat it like a member state. The concept of being a 3rd country isn't really sinking in.

Peregrinus

Skedaddle wrote: »

According to reports this morning, it looks like the EU is going to apply absolute logic as treat the NI border issue with the Republic as an EU issue and whatever the UK has promised the DUP on having absolutely no special status for NI as an internal UK political issue that's nothing to do with the EU.

This isn't news, except possibly to some of the more wishful Brexiters. Para 50 of the Phase 1 Report is expressed, not as something that the UK and the EU have agreed, but as something the UK is to going to do: "The United Kingdom will ensure that no new regulatory barriers develop between Northern Ireland and the rest of the United Kingdom". Everyone knows that this is included for the benefit of the DUP; i.e. it's a domestic political consideration for the UK. If the EU had sought this, Brexiters would have been up in arms about the EU purporting to lay down the law about how the UK's internal affairs are to be conducted after Brexit.

Skedaddle wrote: »

So basically, it's looking like the EU is going to work for its 27 remaining members and not 3rd countries. It is entirely unsurprising and just shows that thay the UK still seems to think that despite leaving the EU and accusing it of being worse than the Star Trek Borg, that it should still somehow treat it like a member state. The concept of being a 3rd country isn't really sinking in.

The withdrawal agreement was never going to stipulate that there would be no new regulatory barriers between NI and GB. That's one way in which the UK could honour its commitments given in para 49, but there are other ways. The EU doesn't care what way it does this, so long as it does it effectively.

Nody

Skedaddle wrote: »

So basically, it's looking like the EU is going to work for its 27 remaining members and not 3rd countries. It is entirely unsurprising and just shows that thay the UK still seems to think that despite leaving the EU and accusing it of being worse than the Star Trek Borg, that it should still somehow treat it like a member state. The concept of being a 3rd country isn't really sinking in.

Well I think the problem is not that UK don't know what a third party country is but rather that they don't think themselves as one in regards to EU due to previous connections. Due to this they don't want to accept the implications of leaving EU would be and all the talk about the "special relationship" that should exist afterwards were they are not in EU but a 1.5nd rather than 3rd country for status with EU while having full freedom of course.

That is what I think will come as a great shock to many UK politicians once they finally get to see the full impact of becoming a third party country will entail. How ever by then it's most likely to late to turn the ship on the subject as this realization will only come at a point post leaving EU + a number of months when they do something and get annoyed why it's so complicated now and suddenly get a light bulb effect of it all.

Skedaddle

It's going to be big news to the DUP which could leave them in a position where they're going to have to make a decision to either play ball or collapse the UK government.

In some ways, the Tories might even like that as it would save them a rebellion and they could blame Ulster loyalists.

Having the DUP collapse the Government would be another way or basically kicking the Tory party internal splits down the road for another election. May would potentially even survive as leader of the opposition for a time.

I also think the UK media is blind to the fact that the DUP are perceived as a regional, ultra right wing, religious fundamentalist party and very like the far right that many EU countries have on the edges of politics and don't want to be seen to be rewarding with huge power.

The DUP in this case are extremely toxic to the UK's position abroad.

If you think they're not just do a 2 minute Google and you'll have the same level of info on the DUP as anyone on the continent is likely to have - Paisley rants, mocking minority languages, using technicalities to block same sex marriage, etc etc etc A lot of people still remember Paisley's rant at the Eueopean Parliament when the Pope visited years ago. It's still on YouTube too.

Then add to that the perception of the UK is not the same as it is here. Many wouldn't be all that familiar with the nuances of UK politics anymore than we are with Italian, or Portuguese politics. It's just going to be seen in simple terms.

Sam Russell

First Up wrote: »

I don't know how often this needs to be said but "no deal" DOES NOT mean that nothing moves in or out of the UK.

They may be hit with tarrifs or quotas and border delays would screw up many supply chains to the point of inoperability but there won't be an embargo on trade either. Worst case scenario is WTO terms - vastly inferior to SM membership and the death knell for many UK companies but not a blockade.

On day one of the 'NO DEAL' coming into force, there will be, of necessity, customs checks both into and out of the UK. There is no infrastructure in place ANYWHERE to achieve this. There will be chaos, and queues of lorries, and all business that requires goods in a timely manner will stop business.

Now this will be sorted, but not quickly, and look what happened to KFC when they changed logistic supplier and ran out of chicken - and that was before Brexit.

Tariffs are not the only issue, it is COO, Standards compliance, quotas, customs declarations, collection of VAT and tariffs, etc. There is no Customs handling software in the UK to deal with this, so how do they do it - wave everyone through? Will the French do this?

The world around Dover and Calais will stop.