Brexit discussion thread IV

Rhineshark

McGiver wrote: »

This calculator comes in handy.
http://www.consilium.europa.eu/en/council-eu/voting-system/voting-calculator/
Select "Reinforced Qualified Majority" from the drop-down menu. Set UK as Abstain and then off you go playing different scenarios.

Thanks for linking that. Good idea from whoever came up with it, certainly makes it easier to understand.

Leroy42

Why is anyone in the UK buying this nonsense about the EU bullying etc.

UK want to leave, voted to leave and no one is stopping them.

On the way out the UK is asking for a deal so that they can still get some of the benefits and the EU has given them a price.

Its not really that difficult to understand. The EU don't, and shouldn't, care about whatever Red Lines the UK may or may not have. That is for themselves to work out.

Here are the options (presented on Day 1 by Barnier) which would you like.

UK want something different.

There is no movement for the EU to make. You can have any of a number of options, pick one.

fash

Leroy42 wrote: »

Why is anyone in the UK buying this nonsense about the EU bullying etc.

It feeds their narrative and gives them someone to blame for either the inevitable failure or climb down.

Nody

Leroy42 wrote: »

Why is anyone in the UK buying this nonsense about the EU bullying etc.

UK want to leave, voted to leave and no one is stopping them.

On the way out the UK is asking for a deal so that they can still get some of the benefits and the EU has given them a price.

Its not really that difficult to understand. The EU don't, and shouldn't, care about whatever Red Lines the UK may or may not have. That is for themselves to work out.

The only answer I've gotten to since the referendum is that because they don't understand how much of what they got are due to EU (assuming it's simply there due to UK being awesome). They then correlate losing said benefits as EU being a bully removing what should always been theirs anyway but EU decides to stop them from having it due to being petty. The fact they don't have said benefits with any country outside of EU (a bit of a hint hint nudge nudge clue) don't seem to register in their world view of "facts".

Strazdas

Leroy42 wrote: »

Why is anyone in the UK buying this nonsense about the EU bullying etc.

It's an easy one to answer. Brexit is an angry protest movement and defines itself by what it is against, not what it is for. It is all about tearing something down rather than building something new up. Therefore it is 100% dependent on scapegoats and having people to blame.

trellheim

I have been watching carefully for any signs of anyone of the EU27 (besides us ) enthusing about Chequers or any other. As far as I can tell its watch closely for any news from Barnier( or Robbins, but that means essentially Theresa May ).

I think everyone wants 2 weeks off at this stage but it really does not leave much time to prep for October EU council where I think a lot of Brexit needs to be locked down.
As we've seen, though, with the current idiocy, this looks like it will remain the current version unless there is a hug move from one side or the other.

So what happens if there is no breakthrough

Leroy42

The WP won't even get accepted by the UK parliament, its a dead duck anyway, so not sure why the UK are getting so upset that the EU didn't like it.

Boris and Davies both resigned over. There was amendments voted into it, the government actually ended up having to vote an amendment into the WP which effectively made the WP undoable.

The movement must come from the UK. The UK spend close to 18 months telling everyone that they defo had a position but couldn't tell anyone in case that weakened their negotiation strategy. Then the announce a plan, the government nearly falls, the plan is tron to shreds on all sides, yet they seem to be under the impression that they have done all that needs to be done.

The EU should simply ask TM what that Labour MP asked her in the hearing. How will the collecting and repatriation of tariffs work in regards to the traders? Since the WP rules out any tariff collection unless it is done on both sides, and the EU has already, repeatedly , stated, that they will not get a third country to collect tariffs, how does TM aim to square this new problem.

Fox, it is not just EU intransigence, your own government, of which you are a cabinet member of, has delivered a proposal that even the UK agrees is unworkable.

An Ciarraioch

But no deal is better than a bad deal!

https://twitter.com/MsHelicat/status/1026208913648242688

lawred2

An Ciarraioch wrote: »

But no deal is better than a bad deal!

https://twitter.com/MsHelicat/status/1026208913648242688

That's a serious stretch. Neighboring countries would not have been envisaged to include a member state willingly creating the situation where they themselves became a neighboring country.

The notion that the EU is to be held responsible for not making an unworkable UK proposal workable is laughably deluded.

Trasna1

An Ciarraioch wrote: »

But no deal is better than a bad deal!

https://twitter.com/MsHelicat/status/1026208913648242688

Ridiculous. That provision is merely aspirational as it cannot be enforced. What court is the UK going to take the EU to?

The Telegraph needs to cop on with it's coverage, a bit of honesty instead of playing to their gallery wouldn't go amiss.

Leroy42

So having failed to come up with a workable plan themselves, they are going to try to bully the EU into giving them special treatment?

Thargor

An Ciarraioch wrote: »

But no deal is better than a bad deal!

https://twitter.com/MsHelicat/status/1026208913648242688

Sky News went straight to talking about how that was really clutching at straws, they seemed a bit embarrassed by it.

breatheme

They can pick whatever special treatment they like: Ukraine, Switzerland, Norway...

Infini

Honestly you'd wonder why one of them at this point if there's any point in entertaining these deluded fools at this point. This whole rhetoric of crap like intransigence etc, is hypocracy of the highest order because we've all seen its the UK who are the one's guilty of this to begin with. Sadly what make's this worse is that some still go around thinking they're somehow in any position to be saying what they're saying.

They got nothing, they can't even negotiate a bloody coherent position and IMO this whole carry on reeks of one thing besides being utterly daft: Desperation. They're running out of road here and aren't gonna hold together much longer at this rate.

Spanish Eyes

Apart from May's desperate meeting with Macron at the hideaway, it is not looking good. And even that meeting was a humiliation for May.

But I think the worst case scenarios are being signalled now, you know... stocking up, drastic queues at Dover and elsewhere, food prices rising and so on, that anything, anything other than a Crash Out will be a good move now.

Rees Mogg and a few rabid dogs are running the UK now for their own ends. Very worrying really the power that cabal seem to have now. Mostly for their own benefit it has to be said.

I am just musing here, and of course I could be totally wrong about all this.

Strazdas

Spanish Eyes wrote: »

Apart from May's desperate meeting with Macron at the hideaway, it is not looking good. And even that meeting was a humiliation for May.

But I think the worst case scenarios are being signalled now, you know... stocking up, drastic queues at Dover and elsewhere, food prices rising and so on, that anything, anything other than a Crash Out will be a good move now.

Rees Mogg and a few rabid dogs are running the UK now for their own ends. Very worrying really the power that cabal seem to have now. Mostly for their own benefit it has to be said.

I am just musing here, and of course I could be totally wrong about all this.

Jon Craig of Sky News was saying today that Macron and Barnier are friends and Barnier is a regular visitor to the Elysee Palace. It shows how completely deluded May is in thinking she could get Macron to pull a fast one on his pal.

Peregrinus

Strazdas wrote: »

Jon Craig of Sky News was saying today that Macron and Barnier are friends and Barnier is a regular visitor to the Elysee Palace. It shows how completely deluded May is in thinking she could get Macron to pull a fast one on his pal.

I don't think she was trying to get Macron to pull a fast one on Barnier. Barniet would quite happily negotiate within a different mandate, if the Council had given him a different mandate.

She was in fact trying to get Macron to change his view on the relative merits of protecting and defending the Single Market, versus maximising trade with the UK. It was always a long shot, and even attempting it looks like an act of desperation on May's part. Which, I think, it was.

EdgeCase

The other thing to remember is that the majority of French politicians from any of the main stream parties have absolutely no interest whatsoever in providing a Brexit that gives Marine Le Pen a notion that she could take France for a similar ride, with the expectation of a positive outcome to a Frexit.

Macron's domestic political interest is to give the UK a dose of a harsh reality check.

murphaph

EdgeCase wrote: »

The other thing to remember is that the majority of French politicians from any of the main stream parties have absolutely no interest whatsoever in providing a Brexit that gives Marine Le Pen a notion that she could take France for a similar ride, with the expectation of a positive outcome to a Frexit.

Macron's domestic political interest is to give the UK a dose of a harsh reality check.

Indeed, Macron is completely the wrong man to be asking for favours that make leaving the EU seem like a good idea. He's an integrationist. He absolutely cannot afford to make concessions or the French right will use these concessions as ammunition in their own bid to depart from the EU. May must have been quite desperate to even try it. I wonder what that signals...either she realises she is running out of all road and pulls the emergency brake or drives over the cliff edge (if parliament is stupid enough to let her).

Peregrinus

murphaph wrote: »

Indeed, Macron is completely the wrong man to be asking for favours that make leaving the EU seem like a good idea. He's an integrationist. He absolutely cannot afford to make concessions or the French right will use these concessions as ammunition in their own bid to depart from the EU. May must have been quite desperate to even try it. I wonder what that signals...either she realises she is running out of all road and pulls the emergency brake or drives over the cliff edge (if parliament is stupid enough to let her).

The only sense that I can make of it is that May is positioning herself to say to the ultra-Brexiters, "There is no alternative to a deal on terms acceptable to the EU. I have tried everything I can to get better [from a Brexity point of view] terms - even appealing to Emmanuel Macron's better nature - but this is the best we can get."

It helps that the current "Crash-out Brexit will be EU's fault" line appeals to the baser instincts of the ultra-Brexiteers. If they hear the EU or its member states being bashed they cannot but join in. But once they have gone on record as castigating the EU for being responsible for the calamity of any no-deal Brexit that may eventuate, it's harder for them to turn round later and go back to the "no-deal is not a big deal" line. In October, when May says "We have to accept the EU terms, because we have to have a deal" it's that bit harder for the ultras to say no, better to crash out with no deal.

Panrich

Peregrinus wrote: »

The only sense that I can make of it is that May is positioning herself to say to the ultra-Brexiters, "There is no alternative to a deal on terms acceptable to the EU. I have tried everything I can to get better [from a Brexity point of view] terms - even appealing to Emmanuel Macron's better nature - but this is the best we can get."

It helps that the current "Crash-out Brexit will be EU's fault" line appeals to the baser instincts of the ultra-Brexiteers. If they hear the EU or its member states being bashed they cannot but join in. But once they have gone on record as castigating the EU for being responsible for the calamity of any no-deal Brexit that may eventuate, it's harder for them to turn round later and go back to the "no-deal is not a big deal" line. In October, when May says "We have to accept the EU terms, because we have to have a deal" it's that bit harder for the ultras to say no, better to crash out with no deal.

Interesting times with Fox, Hunt, Carney all lining up warning about no deal and Telegraph headlines blaming EU intransigence for the current impasse. It’s all pointing to a capitulation but at what price for future UK/EU relations if the EU is the villain of the piece. It doesn’t seem conducive for long term stability.

Jim2007

breatheme wrote: »

They can pick whatever special treatment they like: Ukraine, Switzerland, Norway...

The can't pick Switzerland as you call it, the EU Commission have rule out there ever being another Swiss Bilateral style agreement. It has proved far too complicated to implement and extend. If it was not so complicated and do something else they would at this stage.

Peregrinus

Panrich wrote: »

Interesting times with Fox, Hunt, Carney all lining up warning about no deal and Telegraph headlines blaming EU intransigence for the current impasse. It’s all pointing to a capitulation but at what price for future UK/EU relations if the EU is the villain of the piece. It doesn’t seem conducive for long term stability.

It was always going to be this way. Brexiters promised something they couldn't deliver and, when they can't deliver it, naturally they are not going to accept an responsibility, but instead look for someone to blame. And while no doubt they will blame a whole galaxy of people other than themselves, the EU was always going to be a major target because, hey, they're Brexiters, it's instinctive.

So, yes, it will be rough for a while. But the EU can withstand a bit of disrespect from a non-member state. And the hope has to be that when the fuss dies down and passions cool, the broad middle in Britain will come to see Brexit as a mistake, and Brexiteers as charlatans, and they won't be so prone to hate the EU merely because Brexiteers tell them to.

Bigus

Peregrinus wrote: »

It was always going to be this way. Brexiters promised something they couldn't deliver and, when they can't deliver it, naturally they are not going to accept an responsibility, but instead look for someone to blame. And while no doubt they will blame a whole galaxy of people other than themselves, the EU was always going to be a major target because, hey, they're Brexiters, it's instinctive.

So, yes, it will be rough for a while. But the EU can withstand a bit of disrespect from a non-member state. And the hope has to be that when the fuss dies down and passions cool, the broad middle in Britain will come to see Brexit as a mistake, and Brexiteers as charlatans, and they won't be so prone to hate the EU merely because Brexiteers tell them to.

Ah yes The Brexit Blame game , As correctly predicted by knowledgable posters in this Boards thread 2 years ago.

Igotadose

Services sector in the UK contracting for the first time since 2010. Manufacturing still growing slightly.

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/business/news/uk-services-sector-shrinking-economy-outlook-no-deal-brexit-bdo-research-a8477981.html

And, this is before Brexit hits, when services imo will fall off a cliff, especially with all the financial services loss.

Igotadose

EU looking to reroute port traffic from Ireland to Belgium & Netherlands, post-Brexit, rather than to France. Interesting point that the concern appears to be customs traffic backlog at the French ports. Makes the French ports ineligible for a bunch of infrastructure funds coming available. The decision is not yet reached, hasn't been debated yet and like so many many things is dependent on the Brexit negotiation outcomes. It is good to see the EU is keeping this kind of thing in their headlights. Not sure of the transit times involved, but it seems like it'll take longer to get Irish products to EU markets, France is closer. Maybe the port traffic delays in France that'll be lost, is worth it. As the volume of Irish traffic is probably not a huge percentage of what lands in Cherbourg and Calais, and guessing that Belgium and the Netherlands won't be as busy, overall this might be a win for Ireland. Too much unknown to tell.

https://www.politico.eu/article/brexit-french-ireland-ports-cut-out-of-eu-trade-route-after-brexit/

Nody

Igotadose wrote: »

EU looking to reroute port traffic from Ireland to Belgium & Netherlands, post-Brexit, rather than to France. Interesting point that the concern appears to be customs traffic backlog at the French ports. Makes the French ports ineligible for a bunch of infrastructure funds coming available. The decision is not yet reached, hasn't been debated yet and like so many many things is dependent on the Brexit negotiation outcomes. It is good to see the EU is keeping this kind of thing in their headlights. Not sure of the transit times involved, but it seems like it'll take longer to get Irish products to EU markets, France is closer. Maybe the port traffic delays in France that'll be lost, is worth it. As the volume of Irish traffic is probably not a huge percentage of what lands in Cherbourg and Calais, and guessing that Belgium and the Netherlands won't be as busy, overall this might be a win for Ireland. Too much unknown to tell.

https://www.politico.eu/article/brexit-french-ireland-ports-cut-out-of-eu-trade-route-after-brexit/

Honestly Belgium is probably better simply because the likes of Rotterdam etc. have such great connections to the rest of Europe on rail, truck etc. that you get very good prices on shipping (trucks are close to guaranteed to come out of there with goods meaning you don't pay for empty km to drive the truck around). JIT deliveries should be able to work around the longer transit time simply by having more in transit if the frequency of shipping is high enough as it's reliable in transit times; fresh products that need next day delivery are the obvious potential issue.

Leroy42

Peregrinus wrote: »

The only sense that I can make of it is that May is positioning herself to say to the ultra-Brexiters, "There is no alternative to a deal on terms acceptable to the EU. I have tried everything I can to get better [from a Brexity point of view] terms - even appealing to Emmanuel Macron's better nature - but this is the best we can get."

I am starting to believe (maybe hope more than anything) that this is in fact the only real outcome.

They simply cannot go with no deal. The UK, at the very least, need a transition period. They have 'prepared' on that basis. There is simply not enough time left to be close to ready for 29th March crash out. The UK know it, the EU know it.

And that is before you get into the fact that a no deal, even if prepared for, would be terrible for the UK. Article in the UKIndo today about Australian beef industry looking to flood the UK market with Australian beef. The US would be looking to do the same. IN the short term the Brexiteers will applaud a drop in prices as proof that Brexit worked, but will be quite when a year or two later all the UK farms are sold off.

At every step in the process May has moved to the EU position. I was seen as a holding strategy but crunch time is coming. She would need to show previously unseen levels of determination, strength and leadership to change now.

On the other side, of course, is the fact that the likes of ERG need to nothing at this stage to prevent a crash out. But if it comes to a vote on the deal, or no deal, will MPs really vote for the latter? Will they really vote for something that, at least in the short-term, is going to cause such problems and probably a recession? Sure the people want Brexit, but we all know that what people really care about is food on the table, money for going out, and healthcare etc etc. Ideology tends to take a back seat when you are on the dole and hungry.

Jim2007

Trasna1 wrote: »

Ridiculous. That provision is merely aspirational as it cannot be enforced. What court is the UK going to take the EU to?

The Telegraph needs to cop on with it's coverage, a bit of honesty instead of playing to their gallery wouldn't go amiss.

Actually what A8 states:

Article 8

Print Email
1. The Union shall develop a special relationship with neighbouring countries, aiming to establish an area of prosperity and good neighbourliness, founded on the values of the Union and characterised by close and peaceful relations based on cooperation.

2. For the purposes of paragraph 1, the Union may conclude specific agreements with the countries concerned. These agreements may contain reciprocal rights and obligations as well as the possibility of undertaking activities jointly. Their implementation shall be the subject of periodic consultation.

So the Union is required to develop relationships in line with it values and principles. And it is not required to inter into any agreements, unless it wishes to do so.

So where is the problem???

Leroy42

Whilst I applaud you for the knowledge of the sections, I fear that it was a waste of time.

The headline is nothing but that. A go at trying to blame the EU for the massive, monumental mess that they have created with BRexit. Whether it has any basis in truth is irrelevant. Once the headline is out there other media will feel obliged to talk about it, and that means bringing balance, as to simply bring on some EU expert to point out what you just have would be claimed as bias and lack of time for the Brexit "position".

If it was even remotely true, surely the question is why the feck did they bother with the Chequers position? Why did May adopt a position where she lost two senior cabinet ministers? Why are they only finding this little nugget out now? Was HMG not aware of this before. Have they just spend 18 months negotiating when in reality (their reality!) the EU have no choice to do a deal?