Brexit discussion thread IV

LuckyLloyd

Leroy42 wrote: »

On a slightly different topic, the more I see of TM the more I am staggered that this person ever made it to PM. I have yet to see anything even close to leadership. She is bad with people, bad at interviews, bad on camera. She lacks clarity when she talks. It might simply be the way she is, but she comes across to me as always nervous, defensive and unsure. Not having a go at her, but how anybody thought she was ever PM material is beyond me.

Brexit created her. She would never have been PM otherwise. She'd have played out another half decade as a front bencher - though possibly she'd have gone down for the Windrush scandal and that would have been that.

ancapailldorcha

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

Brexit created her. She would never have been PM otherwise. She'd have played out another half decade as a back bencher - though possibly she'd have gone down for the Windrush scandal and that would have been that.

It's not just created her, it actively protects her. Brexit will be disastrous. Johnson, Rees-Mogg and co. know this so they'll leave her to take the fall for now. Once the dust settles, they'll likely get serious about assuming control of the party.

breatheme

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

Brexit created her. She would never have been PM otherwise. She'd have played out another half decade as a back bencher - though possibly she'd have gone down for the Windrush scandal and that would have been that.

Yeah, that would've been May resigning instead of Amber Judd.

briany

breatheme wrote: »

True. Escaped me for a second there.

I've said this before, but I came upon this article at work today... how about letting NI decide? That would be the best way to move past this impasse.

As the Brexiteers like to say, there's already been a democratic vote. Any further iterations of democracy are not allowed. They're bad..... unless they'd work out in Brexit's favour, in which case they're good.

So shut up NI, and shut up, Scotland. Your opinion does not matter. Better buckle up, 'cause it looks like we're going over the cliff. Actually - probably doesn't matter if you buckle up or not. Let's have a contest to see who can scream the loudest on the way down.

Imreoir2

Seemingly the UK is frustrated that Barnier is not available for talks with Rabb and that the promise of intensified talks at the top level have so far not been realised.

There seems to be a difference of understanding on the purpose of top level meetings, with the EU side seeing their purpose as reviewing progress made in detailed negioations at lower levels, while the UK wants to use them as an opportunity to pressure Barnier to talk about and presumably accept the Chequers plan.

Representations have been made to the EU in which commission officials were told that Raab required lengthy meetings to discuss the detail of the Chequers plan, which the UK believes is not being given the attention it deserves.

In relation to the backstop, it seems that negioations have bogged down compleatly with the UK trying to leverage progress on the backstop to get further acceptance of the Chequers plan.

The Guardian has learned that discussions over Northern Ireland proved to be some of the most difficult yet, with both sides digging in.

Irish government officials, briefed on the meeting, were told that the UK side had insisted that progress on avoiding a hard border on the island of Ireland could not be made unless there was progress on Chequers.

The EU, in turn, repeated that the British government needed to live up to the commitments it made on an “all weather” solution to avoiding a hard border through a backstop solution in the withdrawal agreement, which would snap into place if a wider deal or bespoke technological solution did not solve the problem.

Sources said the talks were so difficult that the only positive that could be taken was that the clash between the officials had been aired now rather than later in the year.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/aug/29/brexit-dominic-raab-frustrated-by-michel-barnier-lack-of-availability-on-talks

Unpossible

Sassygirl1999 wrote: »

Are the scallop wars a new sign of remainiac tensions?
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-45337091

I was going to post that too.

If I understand things the area is in French waters, so if the UK goes down the road of not allowing EU boats in their waters, then they will lose access to these fishing grounds.

Sassygirl1999

Unpossible wrote: »

I was going to post that too.

If I understand things the area is in French waters, so if the UK goes down the road of not allowing EU boats in their waters, then they will lose access to these fishing grounds.

pretty heated scenes in this video, like whale wars, and some boats sank in that I recall, what next calling the Prince Charles Or queen Elizabeth the protect fishermen

Leroy42

correct horse battery staple wrote: »

DUP must be raging. They only get 1 billion for NI while bunch of African countries not part of UK get 4x

Well, TBF, NI already get £9bn a year already. The £1bn was extra.

That another 1bn, with this 4bn, TM is making it clear they will go ahead with their own version of Galileo (lets say 5bn), 3bn for the Brexit readiness fund. On top of that the economy is calculated to be down £400m per week since the vote.

But they see increasing food banks!

trellheim

TM is making it clear they will go ahead with their own version of Galileo

Without wishing to sound flippant, there's some real air quotes around that ; UK would need to throw so much money at that project - what, 17 satellites ? Lets see if they put some real startup money into it - this is only negotiating BS.

flatty

breatheme wrote: »

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

Brexit created her. She would never have been PM otherwise. She'd have played out another half decade as a back bencher - though possibly she'd have gone down for the Windrush scandal and that would have been that.

Yeah, that would've been May resigning instead of Amber Judd.

May took the opportunity to shaft the potential Amber rudd threat gleefully.

J Mysterio

Sassygirl1999 wrote: »

Are the scallop wars a new sign of remainiac tensions?
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-45337091

Shocking scenes there! Dangerous!

lawred2

trellheim wrote: »

Without wishing to sound flippant, there's some real air quotes around that ; UK would need to throw so much money at that project - what, 17 satellites ? Lets see if they put some real startup money into it - this is only negotiating BS.

https://www.express.co.uk/news/politics/1009734/brexit-news-theresa-may-galileo-alternative-eu-brexit-latest

Express spinning this as a blow to Brussels whereas I see 1Bn spent for no return with a further how many billion required to design, develop, engineer and commission a replica system..

How is this a threat or a blow to the EU?

It's disappointing I'm sure for the EU but it's just another disappointing aspect of Brexit.

Does Britain generate any leverage here in claiming that they are to build their own version?

breatheme

It isn't. In fact, I'm actually surprised the EU are not threatening to directly kick them out. It was the UK who insisted that Galileo not be fully open to third countries.

As an aside, I thoroughly dislike the Express headlines. Those capitals. HUGE blow. Just, ugh.

Rhineshark

lawred2 wrote: »

https://www.express.co.uk/news/politics/1009734/brexit-news-theresa-may-galileo-alternative-eu-brexit-latest

Express spinning this as a blow to Brussels whereas I see 1Bn spent for no return with a further how many billion required to design, develop, engineer and commission a replica system..

How is this a threat or a blow to the EU?

It's disappointing I'm sure for the EU but it's just another disappointing aspect of Brexit.

Does Britain generate any leverage here in claiming that they are to build their own version?

I doubt it really. The Brexiters have two parallel stories (Britain made this and can make another one by stealing the IP along with, concurrently, that Galileo is an over-priced piece of cr*p that the Chinese can get into). The irony of holding both these positions appears to be escaping many.

Britain does have a card to play regarding security and military, but at this point I think they've squandered it. This government is simply deeply untrustworthy and a deal regarding security would have to be suspect.

Zubeneschamali

lawred2 wrote: »

https://www.express.co.uk/news/politics/1009734/brexit-news-theresa-may-galileo-alternative-eu-brexit-latest

BRITAIN is serious about its threat to withdraw support for Europe's new satellite navigation system, Theresa May insisted yesterday,

I know it's the Express, but I am still amazed at the spin they can put on this stuff.

Britain is not "threatening to withdraw support" from the Galileo system - Britain is leaving the EU and as a consequence losing access to the system, an EU project.

Leroy42

Rhineshark wrote: »

I doubt it really. The Brexiters have two parallel stories (Britain made this and can make another one by stealing the IP along with, concurrently, that Galileo is an over-priced piece of cr*p that the Chinese can get into). The irony of holding both these positions appears to be escaping many.

Britain does have a card to play regarding security and military, but at this point I think they've squandered it. This government is simply deeply untrustworthy and a deal regarding security would have to be suspect.

If the UK had started off this process and a respectful manner they would have done so much better. Instead TM gave the Lanchaster House speech (I think that was it, the 1st one in any case)where she basically told the EU that the UK were in charge, the EU had better get into line or the UK would take the ball.

Then tried to use the EU citizens as poker chips, they continue to state that they will withhold payment of their obligations unless they get everything they want, they have tried to go over Barniers head, and today they are complaining that Barnier is not available for talks, after Davies turning up for only a few hours over 18 months. Tie that in with the way they have messed around with the December agreement.

If the UK did ever have any goodwill within the EU, and I assume they did, they have clearly blown it by now. It is clear that this is a battle for who wins, not a mutually beneficial separation. It is also clear that the likes of the ERG will see any deal as simply a stepping stone to further withdrawal, that any agreement will not last and only leave the EU is a continually argument over regulations etc.

sink

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

BRITAIN is serious about its threat to withdraw support for Europe's new satellite navigation system, Theresa May insisted yesterday,

I know it's the Express, but I am still amazed at the spin they can put on this stuff.

Britain is not "threatening to withdraw support" from the Galileo system - Britain is leaving the EU and as a consequence losing access to the system, an EU project.

Well technically speaking they can still be a contributor to Galileo from outside the EU. However they loose access to the encrypted network which they need for military purposes. So the article is not entirely wrong, but that's still a long way from being right.

jm08

I saw somewhere that the UK is blocking any progress on finishing the Galileo project. I think they are very annoyed that they are losing contracts over it (as are the people involved).



Probably trying to keep those people from moving to the EU with this money.

judeboy101

Norway won't be happy nor any other country with deals

https://www.rte.ie/news/brexit/2018/0829/988339-brexit/

trellheim

Update : https://www.rte.ie/news/brexit/2018/0829/988339-brexit/

lawred2

trellheim wrote: »

Update : https://www.rte.ie/news/brexit/2018/0829/988339-brexit/

"Single market means single market ... There is no single market à la carte."

is this not another unsquarable circle?

Zubeneschamali

lawred2 wrote: »

"Single market means single market ... There is no single market à la carte."

is this not another unsquarable circle?

Not at all - the UK will get a free trade agreement, and NI will be an exception, a "special economic zone" or some such. That is where this has always been headed.

That or no deal, and both sides in that article are making "deal" noises.

lawred2

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

Not at all - the UK will get a free trade agreement, and NI will be an exception, a "special economic zone" or some such. That is where this has always been headed.

That or no deal, and both sides in that article are making "deal" noises.

Hasn't that been rejected by Westminster?

Are the DUP going to be onbaord? If they are not then that's the Tory government collapsed!?

trellheim

no it will last as long as a chocolate fireguard until the DUP get their hands on it unless a fix is in , watch the twitterati later .

Zubeneschamali

lawred2 wrote: »

Hasn't that been rejected by Westminster

They have already rejected everything. If they make any deal, it will be something they already rejected.

Imreoir2

lawred2 wrote: »

Hasn't that been rejected by Westminster?

Are the DUP going to be onbaord? If they are not then that's the Tory government collapsed!?

Not really, it is currently illegal for government to set up a special economic zone that would require customs checks between NI and Britain, fortunatly Parliament can't bind itself so that can be changed at the drop of a hat if a majority of MP's support it. If the choice is no deal brexit or agreeing to the backstop, I think May could find the votes.

It might collapse her government if she does, but then again, no deal would also most likely collapse her government. The question is more one of what she wants her legacy to be, food riots on the streets of the UK, or some disgruntled backbenchers and tabloids.

lawred2

Imreoir2 wrote: »

Not really, it is currently illegal for government to set up a special economic zone that would require customs checks between NI and Britain, fortunatly Parliament can't bind itself so that can be changed at the drop of a hat if a majority of MP's support it. If the choice is no deal brexit or agreeing to the backstop, I think May could find the votes.

It might collapse her government if she does, but then again, no deal would also most likely collapse her government. The question is more one of what she wants her legacy to be, food riots on the streets of the UK, or some disgruntled backbenchers and tabloids.

Career politician is likely to be more concerned about disgruntled backbenchers

Zubeneschamali

lawred2 wrote: »

Career politician is likely to be more concerned about disgruntled backbenchers

No, consider Thatcher and the Poll tax riots.

If police are batoning crowds in London rioting because shelves are empty, May and her whole Government are history. We could see a decade of uninterrupted Labour rule.

This is why Corbyn is not stopping them from hitting themselves.

bilston

Leroy42 wrote: »

bilston wrote: »

Like it or not...and I don't like it...but the will of the people is a pretty good reason for continuing with Brexit...but I say that with the strong view that there needs to be a second referendum. A bit like an on screen message on your PC or tablet "Are you sure you wish to delete these files" The British people should have that opportunity as well.

Of course, but that is exactly why the reporter asked the question that since we now know the outcomes (chequers or No Deal) would May still vote for Brexit.

She was unable to answer. Whatever about the rights and wrongs of Brexit, I find it crazy that a PM cannot even stand over the policy that she is pursuing.

This line about "will of the people" seems to me to be being used by the likes of TM etc to try to give themselves a get out if it all goes wrong (I am being generous with the if there).

Yes, the referendum was to leave, but her job is to deliver that in a way that best provides for the UK. At this stage she should really be able to answer if she thinks it is a good idea or not.

Well she was a remainer during the referendum so she didnt think it was a good idea then she could hardly have changed her mind!

ancapailldorcha

bilston wrote: »

Well she was a remainer during the referendum so she didnt think it was a good idea then she could hardly have changed her mind!

She was a lukewarm remainer at best. She gave one speech coming out in favor of remain and couldn't resist bringing up the "tens of thousands" nonsense and was then thankfully sidelined. Unlike Corbyn, I think she did vote Remain not out of enthusiasm but because she felt that the UK would be more secure in the EU.

Funnily enough, I find it hard to muster any sort of disdain for Theresa May. While she is always going to put career and party before country, I do think she does care about the latter unlike Johnson and Gove who seem to only care about themselves.