Brexit discussion thread IV

Ted_YNWA

Apologies if I am being naive, but is a "meaningful vote/referendum" on whatever deal happens a bit pointless.

Yes - grand, deal is sorted.
No - crash out

Sam Russell

Ted_YNWA wrote: »

Apologies if I am being naive, but is a "meaningful vote/referendum" on whatever deal happens a bit pointless.

Yes - grand, deal is sorted.
No - crash out

Unless of course it is:

Yes: Grand, deal sorted.
No : Go back and renegotiate - or do not leave, as crash out is not an option.

ancapailldorcha

Ted_YNWA wrote: »

Apologies if I am being naive, but is a "meaningful vote/referendum" on whatever deal happens a bit pointless.

Yes - grand, deal is sorted.
No - crash out

The idea is to include the option of retaining full EU membership as well, ie to enable people to renege on their original decision which got the UK into this mess.

Ted_YNWA

Sam Russell wrote: »

Unless of course it is:

Yes: Grand, deal sorted.
No : Go back and renegotiate - or do not leave, as crash out is not an option.

Not trying to sound facetious., but it does come across that it will be a case of Carry on Regardless if it is a No deal from the UK side.

There is plenty of visual planning from the EU and industries.

Ferry routes to France would make sense for time at sea, but then logistics when the ships land and where the cargo needs to go.

Leroy42

It really is only stubbornness that is stopping the UK from calling a halt to the whole thing (I mean on their side I know the EU will have a say )

Whether you agree with Brexit or not, it is clear that the TM government has made a complete horlicks of the whole thing.

trellheim

Ferry routes to France would make sense for time at sea, but then logistics when the ships land and where the cargo needs to go.

Analysis has containers via Antwerp and Rotterdam see up thread, not France.

Ted_YNWA

trellheim wrote: »

Analysis has containers via Antwerp and Rotterdam see up thread, not France.

I was just looking at it from France's pov from that article.

Lemming

Capt'n Midnight wrote: »

From The Observer, YouGov polls of 15,000

More than 100 seats that backed Brexit now want to remain in EU

At this stage it looks like the swing is coming from "Labour Leave voters who initially believed that leaving the EU would improve their economic prospects."

My constituency (Labour MP - Gill Furniss) is apparently one of the larger swing constituencies at 12% (from 39% to 51%). It'd be interesting to see what that would equate to in voter numbers given that the referendum total voter count difference between Remain and Leave overall for Sheffield was just over 1000 votes.


Edit: it also made me smile to see that the constituencies of Uxbridge and South Ruislip, Surrey Heath, and .... North East Sommerset have all turned. If only that translated to votes come the next election. Especially Sommerset. One can wish.

Bit cynical

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

The idea is to include the option of retaining full EU membership as well, ie to enable people to renege on their original decision which got the UK into this mess.

I think before a return to full membership could be on the ballot paper, it would need to be legally established that article 50 could be withdrawn. To my knowledge, that has not yet been established.

A possible option might be that the UK would seek to revoke article 50 or, alternatively, apply for reentry to the EU in the event of the exit occurring.

Also, as far as I know, the UK can't unilaterally extend the period of article 50 negotiation.

So the ballot options would have to be a) accept the deal (assuming one has been reached) or b) crash out.

Leroy42

The UK is really running out of time. Even it they do opt to postpone A50 (for which there is no clear option), or if they wish to have a 2nd vote, the details of A50 mean that come 30th March they are out and are out of all the treaties. They seem to be under the impression that a transition period is a given yet have offered nothing in return

Capt'n Midnight

Sam Russell wrote: »

I think that should inform the Labour Party to go all-in with a campaign for reversal of Brexit - or at least a second referendum on the terms of the leave/withdrawal deal. Evan Jezza cannot be that stupid not to see that it would be a winner.

Which is more important ?
The ideological purity of Lexit
or
Bringing down the guberment over Brexit, triggering an election and becoming the next PM ?

It's not even that difficult. Just recycle the slogans from the 1992 US Presidential election
- Change vs. more of the same.
- It's the economy, stupid
- Don't forget health care

Leroy42

I honestly cannot see why Labour have followed the path they have. Essentially they a=have pretty much agreed with Tories and the question of the generation. With the vote being so evenly split, what advantage did they see if dong that? They be getting a portion of the leave vote, split with the Tories and UKIP.

They didn't even need to go with Remain, a simple 'only support a good deal' option would have sufficed. I know that messed around with a CU instead of The CU, but even that came across as not really having a position and wanting to have it every way.

And it seems that many young people are against Brexit, yet still in favor of Corbyn despite him being very much for Brexit.

If they really want Brexit cancelled, they should have been lobbying Corbyn to get of the fence and actually stand up for their belief. It seems they are as under his spell as the Brexiteers are under that of Boris and the likes.

Capt'n Midnight

Sam Russell wrote: »

Unless of course it is:

Yes: Grand, deal sorted.
No : Go back and renegotiate - or do not leave, as crash out is not an option.

It depends on the sort of choices are given.

A "take it or leave it" referendum is of no use to a Remainer.

Especially if the "deal" is still only a wish list to be presented to the EU rather than a pre-approved one.

And there's also the problem of the EU not agreeing to concessions if they vote against a deal.


They should use PR choices because Brexit is complex and it would be too easy to skew the choices to get the desired result.
- Remain
- Deal
- Leave without Deal

First Up

Capt'n Midnight wrote: »

Sam Russell wrote: »

Unless of course it is:

Yes: Grand, deal sorted.
No : Go back and renegotiate - or do not leave, as crash out is not an option.

It depends on the sort of choices are given.

A "take it or leave it" referendum is of no use to a Remainer.

Especially if the "deal" is still only a wish list to be presented to the EU rather than a pre-approved one.

And there's also the problem of the EU not agreeing to concessions if they vote against a deal.


They should use PR choices because Brexit is complex and it would be too easy to skew the choices to get the desired result.
- Remain
- Deal
- Leave without Deal

Allow me spell it out in words of few syllables;

The EU deals with the governments of the member states.

The government of the UK has triggered A50. What else the UK does is its own business.

If the government of the UK wants to rescind A50, it can ask and the EU will think about it.

Nothing else comes into it. The UK can vote for whatever it likes.

cml387

Leroy42 wrote: »

I honestly cannot see why Labour have followed the path they have. Essentially they a=have pretty much agreed with Tories and the question of the generation. With the vote being so evenly split, what advantage did they see if dong that? They be getting a portion of the leave vote, split with the Tories and UKIP.

They didn't even need to go with Remain, a simple 'only support a good deal' option would have sufficed. I know that messed around with a CU instead of The CU, but even that came across as not really having a position and wanting to have it every way.

And it seems that many young people are against Brexit, yet still in favor of Corbyn despite him being very much for Brexit.

If they really want Brexit cancelled, they should have been lobbying Corbyn to get of the fence and actually stand up for their belief. It seems they are as under his spell as the Brexiteers are under that of Boris and the likes.

Corbyn is hard left, and his advisors (especially Seamus Milne) are also hard left. They are instinctively anti-EU, seeing it as a capitalist monolith. So no, don't expect anything from Labour.

McGiver

First Up wrote: »

Allow me spell it out in words of few syllables;

The EU deals with the governments of the member states.

The government of the UK has triggered A50. What else the UK does is its own business.

If the government of the UK wants to rescind A50, it can ask and the EU will think about it.

Nothing else comes into it. The UK can vote for whatever it likes.

Of course HMG can put whatever they want on the ballot. But the question is whether they can put something unworkable there (they must know the Chequers is bollocks). What would they exactly do if the electorate voted for Deal? There isn't one and there won't one. What Deal would they say deliver then?

McGiver

cml387 wrote: »

Corbyn is hard left, and his advisors (especially Seamus Milne) are also hard left. They are instinctively anti-EU, seeing it as a capitalist monolith. So no, don't expect anything from Labour.

This always makes me laugh.

For hard right - the EU is a Socialist conspiracy.
For hard left - the EU is a neoliberal capitalist conspiracy.

First Up

McGiver wrote: »

First Up wrote: »

Allow me spell it out in words of few syllables;

The EU deals with the governments of the member states.

The government of the UK has triggered A50. What else the UK does is its own business.

If the government of the UK wants to rescind A50, it can ask and the EU will think about it.

Nothing else comes into it. The UK can vote for whatever it likes.

Of course HMG can put whatever they want on the ballot. But the question is whether they can put something unworkable there (they must know the Chequers is bollocks). What would they exactly do if the electorate voted for Deal? There isn't one and there won't one. What Deal would they say deliver then?

An internal UK ballot means diddly-squat. The only vote that matters to the EU is that of the UK parliament.

The UK electorate can vote for whatever it likes

Scoondal

I am in favour of U.K. leaving E.U.. They have never brought anything to the table regarding European solidarity of nations.
I have always felt more at home in our traditional trading countries : France, Spain and Portugal.

Strazdas

Leroy42 wrote: »

It really is only stubbornness that is stopping the UK from calling a halt to the whole thing (I mean on their side I know the EU will have a say )

Whether you agree with Brexit or not, it is clear that the TM government has made a complete horlicks of the whole thing.

They are so wedded to the "will of the people" and "democracy" thing that nobody can publicly admit the referendum was a shambles built on lies and deceit and that the public screwed up big time.

They have to keep up the pretence that everything about the referendum was fine and dandy and that the result must be fully respected - they are even prepared to crash the economy in order to maintain the pretence.

Dyr

McGiver wrote: »

This always makes me laugh.

For hard right - the EU is a Socialist conspiracy.
For hard left - the EU is a neoliberal capitalist conspiracy.

I think both sides would argue that the EU is more of a globalist conspiracy. It's funny that the marxists and capitalists agree that the death of the nation state is the way forward.

Scoondal

Bambi wrote: »

I think both sides would argue that the EU is more of a globalist conspiracy. It's funny that the marxists and capitalists agree that the death of the nation state is the way forward.

That is a great analysis. I never realised that both extemes argue for a similar outcome on nation states.
Personally, I don't see a need for nation states. People are the same people everywhere I've been anyway. What is all this flags and anthems going to achieve anyway ?

Infini

Leroy42 wrote: »

The UK is really running out of time. Even it they do opt to postpone A50 (for which there is no clear option), or if they wish to have a 2nd vote, the details of A50 mean that come 30th March they are out and are out of all the treaties. They seem to be under the impression that a transition period is a given yet have offered nothing in return

I'll be honest the way things look atm, the government is incompetent, the currency is sliding and things are looking crappier by the day. That being said if the pressure for a 2nd referendum grows large enough May could possibly call a 2nd referendum to abandon this farce. She's a lame duck Prime Minster at this stage but in theory with mounting public pressure it could be her own way of getting the country out of this situation if the EU is willing (and has said in the past they would) and in her own way stick a knife in all the fools who've been her Bane for the last 2 years by triggering a referendum that Remain wins and sinks their entire agenda for a long time.

trellheim

Anyway. If a Commons vote was held again it would make no difference; Brexit would still go through. There is far more than enough support from Lab and Con and there is no 3rd way emerging.


Therefore this burning dumpster fire rolling down the hill towards the clifftop (not a great metaphor) cant be stopped from outside (if the EU intervenes it will only speed things up) and the people with the brake lever are fighting in a phonebox . To carry this bad metaphor further the other guy in the dumpster has a rope and can stop all this (Corbyn) but believes dumpsters are ideologically bad and is prepared to go over the cliff on principle.

To carry this overused metaphor even further we are tied to the first dumpster ( actually I'll stop there )

Scoondal

How can Theresa May who was in favour of UK being part of EU, now be the person who is in charge of UK leaving EU ? What a bizarre circumstance. And she is a flawed politician for calling an election that gave her a minority government. Fact is always stranger than fiction. If this was a T.V. drama, people wouldn't watch it because it is too ridiculous.

Infini

trellheim wrote: »

Anyway. If a Commons vote was held again it would make no difference; Brexit would still go through. There is far more than enough support from Lab and Con and there is no 3rd way emerging.


Therefore this burning dumpster fire rolling down the hill towards the clifftop (not a great metaphor) cant be stopped from outside (if the EU intervenes it will only speed things up) and the people with the brake lever are fighting in a phonebox .

Don't be so sure on the certainty of Brexit, as much as they might want to say otherwise if the shadow of Hard Brexit becomes a near certainty it could cause alot of heads to change course expecially if public opinion swings to remain. It would give those MPs an excuse to get off this train under the right circumstances.

Strazdas

Infini wrote: »

I'll be honest the way things look atm, the government is incompetent, the currency is sliding and things are looking crappier by the day. That being said if the pressure for a 2nd referendum grows large enough May could possibly call a 2nd referendum to abandon this farce. She's a lame duck Prime Minster at this stage but in theory with mounting public pressure it could be her own way of getting the country out of this situation if the EU is willing (and has said in the past they would) and in her own way stick a knife in all the fools who've been her Bane for the last 2 years by triggering a referendum that Remain wins and sinks their entire agenda for a long time.

I'm not convinced a second referendum would / will alleviate things. They are deeply and bitterly divided on Brexit and no matter what the wording of such a referendum or the result, they'll probably still be as divided afterwards.

Bit cynical

Has Ireland made a comment on the routing of Irish shipping to the Northern ports either for or against? Is it just the French at this point? I note that during discussion on this forum some weeks ago, most of us just assumed that we would be able to bypass the UK land bridge and send our goods to France.

Personally, although I don't have knowlege of shipping, I'm surprised that the EU is involved to the extent that they can tell a country which ports it must use in other countries. If we wanted to send goods to Spain, I would have hitherto assumed that it is between the Irish exporter or shipping company and the Spanish ports themselves, i.e., if a ship wants to unload in Barcelona, for example, and there is capacity in that port, then the shipment goes ahead.

Maybe Ireland has to keep quiet at this point as we are trying to achieve other things with the EU?

EdgeCase

I think it's more a question of what the logistics companies here have asked for.
The French ports are smaller and further from core markets and also likely to be clogged with freight delays due to brexit. They're also highly prone to industrial action.

Connecting to big Dutch ports may simply make more sense.

Peregrinus

Bit cynical wrote: »

Has Ireland made a comment on the routing of Irish shipping to the Northern ports either for or against? Is it just the French at this point? I note that during discussion on this forum some weeks ago, most of us just assumed that we would be able to bypass the UK land bridge and send our goods to France.

Personally, although I don't have knowlege of shipping, I'm surprised that the EU is involved to the extent that they can tell a country which ports it must use in other countries. If we wanted to send goods to Spain, I would have hitherto assumed that it is between the Irish exporter or shipping company and the Spanish ports themselves, i.e., if a ship wants to unload in Barcelona, for example, and there is capacity in that port, then the shipment goes ahead.

The EU can't (and doesn't) tell anyone which port to use. It's a single market; you can ship your goods through any port you like.

The proposal is not about directing Irish goods towards particular ports; it's about infrastructure spending to increase port capacity to provide Irish trade with an alternative to the UK landbridge. The proposal is to increase capacity at ports in Belgium and the Netherlands, rather than northern France. The reason is a concern that money spent increasing capacity in French ports will mostly go to alleviating Brexit-related congestion to the benefit of the UK-France trade rather than providing additional capacity for traders to and from Ireland.