Brexit discussion thread IV

Imreoir2

I think it's clear at this stage that we are going to end up with a no-deal Brexit. The question now should be what do we do next?

We have been very focused on the outcome of these negioations and there is a tendancy to see a no-deal brexit as a conclusion, as an end state, rather than as an unpleasant stage on the way to a new relationship between the EU and the UK.

There is no way that the UK will be able to continue without any deal with the EU. It is not a stable end point from which the UK can move forward. The Brexiteers see this and think that exiting the EU with no deal can be used as a step to getting past problems like the NI border. Their stance is that once the UK is out, then they can negioatiate whatever agreements they want with the EU on an ad hoc basis, while ignoring issues that don't suit them like the backstop. The so-called no-deal deal.

Thus far Ireland has succeeded in making the backstop the price for a withdrawl treaty. Now we need to ensure that in the event of a no-deal Brexit, any future relationship with the EU is also dependant on the concession of the backstop. We can't allow the UK to negioatiate deals with the EU post brexit that over time amount to the future relationship it wants with the EU without agreeing to the backstop.

A no-deal Brexit should not be seen as game over, it should be seen as half time.

Havockk

Imreoir2 wrote: »

I think it's clear at this stage that we are going to end up with a no-deal Brexit. The question now should be what do we do next?

We have been very focused on the outcome of these negioations and there is a tendancy to see a no-deal brexit as a conclusion, as an end state, rather than as an unpleasant stage on the way to a new relationship between the EU and the UK.

There is no way that the UK will be able to continue without any deal with the EU. It is not a stable end point from which the UK can move forward. The Brexiteers see this and think that exiting the EU with no deal can be used as a step to getting past problems like the NI border. Their stance is that once the UK is out, then they can negioatiate whatever agreements they want with the EU on an ad hoc basis, while ignoring issues that don't suit them like the backstop. The so-called no-deal deal.

Thus far Ireland has succeeded in making the backstop the price for a withdrawl treaty. Now we need to ensure that in the event of a no-deal Brexit, any future relationship with the EU is also dependant on the concession of the backstop. We can't allow the UK to negioatiate deals with the EU post brexit that over time amount to the future relationship it wants with the EU without agreeing to the backstop.

A no-deal Brexit should not be seen as game over, it should be seen as half time.

I think you could be right, this was David Davis on the Chequers plan.... “actually almost worse than being in”.

How can they sell this to anyone when they can't even agree at cabinet level?

Capt'n Midnight

The divide in UK politics is such that there is no chance of Labour, SNP, or Lib Dems helping the Tories.

The political situation is that its a minority government being propped up by the "Ulster says NO" party, the sort of hardliners that make the UK's "red lines" on Brexit look elastic in comparision

The DUP has spent nearly 600 days out of Regional Government. They've an MP suspended. And the Cash for Ash means chickens are coming home to roast.


From the EU side the last election was an internal matter for the UK so don't expect an extension for another one.


So in light of all this it's quite probable there could be a GE soon. And Labour still haven't given any clarity on their position on Brexit.


This article suggests that the Tories may be getting undermined like Labour was
https://www.express.co.uk/news/politics/1011623/brexit-news-theresa-may-jeremy-corbyn-conservative-labour-party-membership

Pro-Brussels Tories complain that hordes of so-called "Brextremists" are rampaging into Conservative associations in areas that voted firmly for Leave in the 2016 EU referendum.
...
and suggested many of the newcomers were a hard-Right version of Labour's Corbyn-supporting Momentum faction.

for the lolz
https://sluggerotoole.com/2018/08/23/lets-all-take-over-the-uup-for-the-craic/

The UUP is extraordinary ripe for an entryist takeover. The UUP has perhaps as few as 600 active members, every one of whom has an equal vote in leadership contests. A well-organised rugby club could swamp our 3rd largest political party in time for its next annual conference.

Larbre34

Agree, I think an election is more likely the next big shift. The true colours of the Parties and their various factions are now visible following the phoney war of the post-ref/GE 17 period.

The question is, whether the non-Corbynistas in Labour and the pragmatists in the Tories will organise with the Libs and nationalist parties on a putative national unity platform and brexit reality to take the extremists out of the game?

LuckyLloyd

Infini wrote: »

I'll be honest I think what's likely to happen is that there will be a "no deal" Brexit announcement as the EU is not able to get an agreement with a broken UK. The minute this becomes apparent there will be political chaos followed by probably a GE and likely Corbyn winning. After this he'll likely be faced with agreeing to any agreement he can get and promptly and rightly hang it on the Conservatives because they wasted so much time or possibly the Remain forces in the party might push for a 2nd vote to overturn the 1st on the Basis that with so little time left only cancelling Brexit can get them out of the mess they were lead into. Won't make the issue's go away but it would buy a good deal of breathing space to try and sort things out and at least put this whole thing to bed for a while.

Don’t think the EU will do it, even if I think they should.

An Ciarraioch

Havockk wrote: »

Imreoir2 wrote: »

I think it's clear at this stage that we are going to end up with a no-deal Brexit. The question now should be what do we do next?

We have been very focused on the outcome of these negioations and there is a tendancy to see a no-deal brexit as a conclusion, as an end state, rather than as an unpleasant stage on the way to a new relationship between the EU and the UK.

There is no way that the UK will be able to continue without any deal with the EU. It is not a stable end point from which the UK can move forward. The Brexiteers see this and think that exiting the EU with no deal can be used as a step to getting past problems like the NI border. Their stance is that once the UK is out, then they can negioatiate whatever agreements they want with the EU on an ad hoc basis, while ignoring issues that don't suit them like the backstop. The so-called no-deal deal.

Thus far Ireland has succeeded in making the backstop the price for a withdrawl treaty. Now we need to ensure that in the event of a no-deal Brexit, any future relationship with the EU is also dependant on the concession of the backstop. We can't allow the UK to negioatiate deals with the EU post brexit that over time amount to the future relationship it wants with the EU without agreeing to the backstop.

A no-deal Brexit should not be seen as game over, it should be seen as half time.

I think you could be right, this was David Davis on the Chequers plan.... “actually almost worse than being in”.

How can they sell this to anyone when they can't even agree at cabinet level?

And Barnier has essentially trashed the UK's trade plans today, putting a major spanner in JIT to boot:

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/sep/02/michel-barnier-strongly-opposes-may-brexit-trade-proposals

Leroy42

Wow, seems almost peed off based pn those quotes.

Chequers is dead (it was always dead and only kept alive by the EU 8n the hope of making progress) but TM seems to now be of the position that Chequers is actually workable!

Infini

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

Don’t think the EU will do it, even if I think they should.

At some point in November they might though not out of spite but to warn their own side to get ready. Eventually there will have to be a moment of reckoning for all parties concerned because at some point a no deal Brexit just will not be avoidable and it wont be down to the last minute either. The EU doesn't even necessarily have to be spiteful either they could simply put out an even handed position stating that there is no chance of being able to agree and ratify a withdrawal agreement given the current time but could leave the door open for the UK to withdraw if they decide to hold a 2nd vote.

It would be a good way of putting it to the Brexiteers because it would basically mean the EU is willing to let the UK abandon this but it would put the onus firmly on May and the Brexiteers by saying "Your move, you can leave and suffer the consequences that comes with being responsible for this or you can go to the people and ask them if they want this."

The Brexiteers have spouted nonsense like the "will of the people". If that's the case why are they so afraid of a 2nd vote? Simple: Theyre AFRAID of the people changing their minds because they had 2 years of nothing but BS and people won't let them go through with it if given a 2nd vote.

Roanmore

On Sky news early they had 3 people who voted remain, 2 young people and an older property developer (I think). The older guy changed his mind and was now committed to leave. His last statement was "we've seen the EU soften their stance over the last week and have now said come on we have to do a deal".
Just shows how the influence Express / Mail / Telegraph / Sun have.

Sam Russell

Infini wrote: »

At some point in November they might though not out of spite but to warn their own side to get ready. Eventually there will have to be a moment of reckoning for all parties concerned because at some point a no deal Brexit just will not be avoidable and it wont be down to the last minute either. The EU doesn't even necessarily have to be spiteful either they could simply put out an even handed position stating that there is no chance of being able to agree and ratify a withdrawal agreement given the current time but could leave the door open for the UK to withdraw if they decide to hold a 2nd vote.

It would be a good way of putting it to the Brexiteers because it would basically mean the EU is willing to let the UK abandon this but it would put the onus firmly on May and the Brexiteers by saying "Your move, you can leave and suffer the consequences that comes with being responsible for this or you can go to the people and ask them if they want this."

The Brexiteers have spouted nonsense like the "will of the people". If that's the case why are they so afraid of a 2nd vote? Simple: Theyre AFRAID of the people changing their minds because they had 2 years of nothing but BS and people won't let them go through with it if given a 2nd vote.

Is there any evidence that a second referendum would produce a ifferent result, and would it be sufficient to end this Brexit BS?

I think a vote of 55% in favour would be needed to quiet the Brexit lot, but not for long.

First Up

Roanmore wrote: »

On Sky news early they had 3 people who voted remain, 2 young people and an older property developer (I think). The older guy changed his mind and was now committed to leave. His last statement was "we've seen the EU soften their stance over the last week and have now said come on we have to do a deal".
Just shows how the influence Express / Mail / Telegraph / Sun have.

Those rags can spread all the bull**** they like; nobody in Brussels is interested.
It would take a lot of political upheaval to get to another referendum but if it did, even the thickest Brexiteer would by then be able to understand what they were voting for.

Kermit.de.frog

With Barnier's comments coupled with that of TM I think the game is up and we are counting down to a no deal that will be absolutely catastrophic for the UK economy.

We are going to get serious fallout and contagion here but all we can do is hope our own contingencies can insulate us as much ss possible.

I don't think i'm exaggerating and this could be the week the market begins to really attack the British economy.

Barnier's comments at this stage are really remarkable.

Nody

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

With Barnier's comments coupled with that of TM I think the game is up and we are counting down to a no deal that will be absolutely catastrophic for the UK economy.

We are going to get serious fallout and contagion here but all we can do is hope our own contingencies can insulate us as much ss possible.

I don't think i'm exaggerating and this could be the week the market begins to really attack the British economy.

Barnier's comments at this stage are really remarkable.

Doubt it; the market will expect May to tilt when the pressure gets high as usual. I'd expect the market will really tank is when Boris becomes the next PM.

Rain Ascending

An Ciarraioch wrote: »

And Barnier has essentially trashed the UK's trade plans today, putting a major spanner in JIT to boot:

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/sep/02/michel-barnier-strongly-opposes-may-brexit-trade-proposals

One quote that caught my eye from the Guardian's article was this one:

“Outside of the internal market and the customs union, this involves customs formalities and controls that hinder ‘just in time’ production,” Barnier said. “In order for EU carmakers to benefit from the tariff benefits of the EU-Korea agreement, only a certain proportion of the services may be provided in a car in a third country. Businesses have to be careful not to use too many parts of Britain in their vehicles in the future.”

Even if the Withdrawal Agreement is signed, this is one issue that will not go away. In theory, the WA is only an agreement between the EU and UK -- how other countries deal with the basic fact that the UK has left the EU in April next year is up to them. The envisaged WA agreement effectively says that the EU is willing to regard the the UK to have the equivalent status of EU membership in many (but not all) areas -- but this does not bind other countries with whom the EU has signed FTAs.

There was some talk that the EU might lean on some of these other countries to treat the UK (and by extension here, UK component manufacturers) as part of the EU for those areas specified in the WA for the transition period. However, the last I heard, the EU wasn't willing to do so. I'd guess the cost in negotiation capital would be too high. After all, if I were a trade negotiator from another country like Korea, my first response to any such request from my EU counterpart would be to ask "What can you give me in return?" Frankly, it is much easier for the EU to strong-arm its exporting manufacturers to swap out UK components. Hence Barnier's comments above.

The UK has a similar issue when trying to "roll-over" or convert EU/RoW FTAs into UK/RoW FTAs. Its exporting manufacturers need EU components to be qualifying content to satisfy rules of origin. However, I think that it is safe to assume that in many industries, the options for swapping out EU components for UK ones are lot more limited, due to the smaller UK industrial base. So here there is much more incentive for a UK trade negotiator to ask another country to regard EU components as qualifying for rules of origin content. If the UK is successful here then UK exporting manufacturers don't have to do the swap out.

BUT all of this has to be sorted out by March next year for the (possible) transition period.

For all major external FTAs.

How do you like those odds?


Bottom line: Barnier's warning should have been bleedin' obvious to any component manufacturer in the UK or Europe. The media are not digging enough to get at what must be happening in supply chains as we speak.

Strazdas

Sam Russell wrote: »

Is there any evidence that a second referendum would produce a ifferent result, and would it be sufficient to end this Brexit BS?

I think a vote of 55% in favour would be needed to quiet the Brexit lot, but not for long.

They are a bunch of complainers and moaning minnies so it would probably do nothing to appease them. They are perpetually angry and a second referendum would not shut them up.

lawred2

I'm simply in awe of Liam Fox's arrogance in concluding that it is the EU that must come forward and show how to make an unacceptable unworkable UK plan workable..

It's breathtaking

Kermit.de.frog

Quite clear what the EU is saying here.




To paraphrase: "Get out and take the consequences or you can have access to our market as a vassal state".

Strazdas

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

Quite clear what the EU is saying here.




To paraphrase: "Get out and take the consequences or you can have access to our market as a vassal state".

And he's absolutely right. An outside country being given special privileges and opts of most of the Single Market rules (and yet reaping all the benefits) would be met with extreme anger by most of the EU countries, never mind what third countries are asking for.

cml387

Michel Barnier would be wise not to carry out his negotiations with the UK via the
Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung or any other media outlet.

lawred2

cml387 wrote: »

Michel Barnier would be wise not to carry out his negotiations with the UK via the
Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung or any other media outlet.

Why would that be then? Will something sinister happen to him?

Nate--IRL--

cml387 wrote: »

Michel Barnier would be wise not to carry out his negotiations with the UK via the
Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung or any other media outlet.

He isn't. he's reminding the wider world (i.e the UK) of the mandate he's be given from the start .

Nate

Leroy42

cml387 wrote: »

Michel Barnier would be wise not to carry out his negotiations with the UK via the
Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung or any other media outlet.

Haven't HMG been doing just that through their media?
Haven't the UK tried to go over Barriers head by going direct to Macron etc?
Hasn't Raab basically been selling the line the last few weeks that Barrier has not been taking this seriously and the EU needed to match the UK drive and determination?

Clearly Barnier is fed up with the UK messing. The EU held off dismissing Chequers straightaway to try to facilitate the UK government, yet that has pretty much been thrown back in their faces.
The UK continue to try to change both the terms of the negotiations and the position they actually want.

There has been plenty on here, myself included, that questioned why the EU were even bothering to remain engaged as throughout the process the UK have shown a lack of purpose, clarity and seriousness.

I'm surprised he hasn't been even more direct and sooner.

listermint

cml387 wrote: »

Michel Barnier would be wise not to carry out his negotiations with the UK via the
Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung or any other media outlet.

Why because they'll get more crazy ?

Less crazy ?

Infini

lawred2 wrote: »

I'm simply in awe of Liam Fox's arrogance in concluding that it is the EU that must come forward and show how to make an unacceptable unworkable UK plan workable..

It's breathtaking

It's less than breathtaking, more like facepalm worthy. They simply do not get it. They have NOTHING to backup their whole Brexit agenda. It's a total failure of an excercise in self defeat and stupidity. They have every opportunity to just walk away but they cant or wont. Their arrogance and hard headed foolishness is going to cost them far more than they can handle the way they're going.

Sam Russell wrote: »

Is there any evidence that a second referendum would produce a ifferent result, and would it be sufficient to end this Brexit BS?

I think a vote of 55% in favour would be needed to quiet the Brexit lot, but not for long.

I think what people need there is to be basically asked are they sure of this. There wouldn't have been a need for a 2nd vote if the 1st vote was decisive but it wasn't. It was divisive, the leave side essentially cheated and in the 2 years since the UK is in shambles, disarray and has no coherent position except a contradictory chequers plan that's been shredded to pieces already. A 2nd vote wont solve the underlying issue's but it would be enough if the Remain side won to at least contain any further damage for the meantime while Britain has a SERIOUS look at itself and debate its role in the EU and how it wishes to proceed into the future. As it stand's if they continue with this farce it could end up costing them everything including their own country.

As for NI ultimately any future agreement with the EU will have to involve a backstop of some kind. No matter how much Britain moans about this now they basically are for all intent's and purposes breaking an international agreement for their own self interests and the border itself just isn't enforcable. NI is likely to get thrown under the bus and realistically the best option out of this in the long run is reunification with the South.

FrancieBrady

cml387 wrote: »

Michel Barnier would be wise not to carry out his negotiations with the UK via the
Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung or any other media outlet.

Was he not just re-iterating what he said in a speech? Fairly normal behaviour to be honest.

Imreoir2

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

Quite clear what the EU is saying here.




To paraphrase: "Get out and take the consequences or you can have access to our market as a vassal state".

That was always the choice. Lets not bring needlessly emotive tabloid language into the discussion though, Norway is hardily a "vassal state". You decide what kind of relationship you want, access without membership suits Norway, its not an issue of being subjected to external control against your will.

Kermit.de.frog

A new poll tomorrow shows a surge in support for a United Ireland if Brexit goes ahead.

52% would vote for a UI while 39% would vote to remain part of the UK.

Add another few points if a hard border.

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brexit-uk-union-scotland-northern-ireland-nationalists-a8519526.html

Water John

When Barnier reverted to speaking in French, at his last press conf with Raab, it signalled he was getting though and probably very tired of all the nonsense.
He has had great patience over the last 2 years. A thankless job, but he has been admirable.
UK tried all its old tricks, of trying to divide countries, then going over the chief negotiator's head. None of it worked and now reality beckons.
Sadly, has all the hallmarks of no deal.
Unless, as someone above said, this reality kicks into the financial markets, pound falling, capital fleeing, Parliament may have to act. In the end, the country is their responsibility.

That poll Kermit shows the absolute stupidity of the DUP. The crowd propping up the UK Govn't. The EU offer would have solidified NI present political position.

prawnsambo

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Was he not just re-iterating what he said in a speech? Fairly normal behaviour to be honest.

No, he was telling the British government that eating their cake would mean that they wouldn't have it any more. Apparently that sort of impertinence isn't appreciated from johnny foreigner. There will be much finger wagging and harumphing in retaliation and that'll put him in his place.

Interesting that (I think in the original article) German car makers were saying that they were waiting until November and if no progress was made they'd be implementing their contingency plans. Now that's a far greater threat than "he better not, something, something, vewy, vewy angwy".

Imreoir2

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

A new poll tomorrow shows a surge in support for a United Ireland if Brexit goes ahead.

52% would vote for a UI while 39% would vote to remain part of the UK.

Add another few points if a hard border.

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brexit-uk-union-scotland-northern-ireland-nationalists-a8519526.html

Wow, is that the first poll showing majority support for unification in NI?

Obviously you have to take it with a pinch of salt given that NI is notoriously hard to poll accurately and the question is hypothetical, but still it shows that opinion may well be shifting given that similar polls were showing majority support for staying in the UK until recently.