Brexit discussion thread IV

keane2097

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

Exactly. The mantra 'No deal is better than a bad deal' equally applies to the EU.

Actually applies much more to the EU.

Imreoir2

kowtow wrote: »

I don't, particularly.

I'm just considering what I would do if I were in her shoes.

Right, and having done it, how would you save the UK from the consequences of a no-deal Brexit? You could walk away from the table, but that does not mean that you can force your parliament to accept that, nor does it mean that the country is actually ready for a no-deal Brexit, nor that the people will stand for being trapped on an island that is running out of imported food products and medicine. You can't force multinationals not to activate their contingency plans and move significant chunks of their production capisity to the EU. You can't stop the Pound from losing value, wiping out a significant part of the nations wealth. Are you going to raise taxes to try and have enough money to invest in a stimulus package to save the economey from recession, or would you just try to borrow that money right after walking out on your obligations to the EU? It's very easy to just walk away, but what exactly is the plan once you do?

"It'll all be fine, believe in Britain", is not a plan btw.

demfad

http://www.politics.co.uk/blogs/2018/09/20/brexit-brussels-just-got-serious

Entertaining and accurate take from Ian Dunt as always:

Not many people saw that coming. We all expected Brussels to be saying nice things about the Chequers proposals until after the Tory party conference at least.

They did not do that. Instead, they took Chequers down a back alley and kicked its head in. European Council president Donald Tusk said it "will not work" and even held off confirming a special summit in November if Theresa May hadn't sorted the Irish backstop solution by October - something she has said she cannot do.

French president Emmanuel Macron was particularly undiplomatic. "Those who explain that we can easily live without Europe, that everything is going to be all right, and that it's going to bring a lot of money home are liars,” he said.

The only support May seemed to have was from Hungary and Poland, the two right-wing authoritarian governments in Europe, both of whom are under disciplinary proceedings for failing to live up to European values. It is assistance she could probably do without.

In a sense none of this is surprising. Everyone knew Chequers was nonsense, a piece of blithering technical mythmaking intended to solve political problems rather than practical ones.

In reality, once you took off its make-up, it was May's attempt to pretend that she would be able to pass the Irish backstop without strapping the whole UK economy to Europe.

Mr.Nice Guy

I don't get the logic behind Tusk effectively throwing May under the bus before the Tory conference. From what I gather the expectation was they would keep Chequers on life support and torpedo it in October. I can understand wanting to focus minds but the atmosphere in Westminster is so febrile that this might actually lead to the opposite and create more instability.

Are they gambling that if they really ratchet things up the British public will push for this People's Vote? I think it's too late for that.

lawred2

Mr.Nice Guy wrote: »

I don't get the logic behind Tusk effectively throwing May under the bus before the Tory conference. From what I gather the expectation was they would keep Chequers on life support and torpedo it in October. I can understand wanting to focus minds but the atmosphere in Westminster is so febrile that this might actually lead to the opposite and create more instability.

Are they gambling that if they really ratchet things up the British public will push for this People's Vote? I think it's too late for that.

why should the EU work to keep an unworkable plan alive?

What's in it for the EU?

Why would the EU help to keep Theresa May in her position? Is there a sign from her that she is doing her level best to work with the EU? Not really!

Why would pragmatic politicians who see time running out play a time wasting game that serves no purpose whatsoever?

ancapailldorcha

lawred2 wrote: »

why should the EU work to keep an unworkable plan alive?

What's in it for the EU?

Why would the EU help to keep Theresa May in her position? Is there a sign from her that she is doing her level best to work with the EU? Not really!

Why would pragmatic politicians who see time running out play a time wasting game that serves no purpose whatsoever?

Well, it is in the EU's interests to maintain good relations with the UK. The UK is an important trade partner, particularly for Ireland, an important destination for EU migrants and a vital security partner especially given its membership of the Five Eyes agreement, security services and armed forces.

However, British politicians know this and think it is enough to incentivize the EU to compromise its core values in order to give the Brexiteers what they want. This is folly on their part and the result is that now we are heading towards no deal because neither of the two main UK parties have even worked out their own stance on the issue, much less begun to negotiate properly.

In the meantime, the EU has behaved exactly as expected. It's stayed united, particularly with regard to Ireland and has been serious from the get go with special regard for the core values and the integrity of the single market. It's simply to important to compromise this simply because the Conservative party can't keep itself from self-mutilation.

brickster69

kowtow wrote: »

Water John wrote: »

And why Kowtow do you believe that the EU will blink?

I don't, particularly.

I'm just considering what I would do if I were in her shoes.

I would not walk away that's for certain. Play the game till the end when you put the cards on the table.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kBJYl4YgwMY

lawred2

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

Well, it is in the EU's interests to maintain good relations with the UK. The UK is an important trade partner, particularly for Ireland, an important destination for EU migrants and a vital security partner especially given its membership of the Five Eyes agreement, security services and armed forces.

However, British politicians know this and think it is enough to incentivize the EU to compromise its core values in order to give the Brexiteers what they want. This is folly on their part and the result is that now we are heading towards no deal because neither of the two main UK parties have even worked out their own stance on the issue, much less begun to negotiate properly.

In the meantime, the EU has behaved exactly as expected. It's stayed united, particularly with regard to Ireland and has been serious from the get go with special regard for the core values and the integrity of the single market. It's simply to important to compromise this simply because the Conservative party can't keep itself from self-mutilation.

The need to maintain cordial diplomatic relations is an ever present. But playing some nicey nice to facilitate the inner workings of the Tory party or to prolong a delusion that it'll be alright on the night is not in the EU's interest.

kowtow

Mr.Nice Guy wrote: »

I don't get the logic behind Tusk effectively throwing May under the bus before the Tory conference. From what I gather the expectation was they would keep Chequers on life support and torpedo it in October. I can understand wanting to focus minds but the atmosphere in Westminster is so febrile that this might actually lead to the opposite and create more instability.

Are they gambling that if they really ratchet things up the British public will push for this People's Vote? I think it's too late for that.

I don't get that logic either, except perhaps in one respect.

EU made positive noises on the Irish border (leave aside for the moment whether this amounted to an electronic Irish sea border, it could presumably have been sold by TM with a few changes).

UK expected (perhaps) some follow through on warmer noises regarding Chequers being a move in the right direction at Salzburg.

Yesterday TM rejected the new EU border approach, perhaps too curtly?

Is today's unexpected intransigence simply a negotiating response to that? A flexing of muscle?

Certainly downing st are spinning it as an "elbowing" and that a blow up was going to happen at some point.

Is Tusk reminding May that (until today) the EU 27 contained more of her supporters than the Carlton does?

Infini

Mr.Nice Guy wrote: »

I don't get the logic behind Tusk effectively throwing May under the bus before the Tory conference. From what I gather the expectation was they would keep Chequers on life support and torpedo it in October. I can understand wanting to focus minds but the atmosphere in Westminster is so febrile that this might actually lead to the opposite and create more instability.

Are they gambling that if they really ratchet things up the British public will push for this People's Vote? I think it's too late for that.

The situation is already unstable because they cant agree. I said it before only the serious threat of a no-Deal scenario playing out will ever make them cop the hell on at this point. They need the drop of the pound, companies leaving and the clear consequences of THEIR foolishness that they ignored the warnings of in order for them to abort this. At least if it happens now theres a chance of reversal unlike it happening at the last minute when its too late.

Mr.Nice Guy

lawred2 wrote: »

why should the EU work to keep an unworkable plan alive?

What's in it for the EU?

Why would the EU help to keep Theresa May in her position? Is there a sign from her that she is doing her level best to work with the EU? Not really!

Why would pragmatic politicians who see time running out play a time wasting game that serves no purpose whatsoever?

Two words: Boris Johnson.

He takes over and he passes the buck for all the flak that will come to those that came before him.

The man sees himself as Churchill reincarnated and would see this as his post-Chamberlain moment.

As disastrous as May is, she's better than the extremists getting their hands on the wheel.

Zubeneschamali

kowtow wrote: »

Yesterday TM rejected the new EU border approach, perhaps too curtly?

Yes, I'd say that is it. The EU were prepared to play along and pretend Chequers would be a thing with a few little tweaks, and May flatly rejected that opening.


So, screw you, May, sort your own mess out.

Professor Moriarty

kowtow wrote: »

I don't get that logic either, except perhaps in one respect.

EU made positive noises on the Irish border (leave aside for the moment whether this amounted to an electronic Irish sea border, it could presumably have been sold by TM with a few changes).

UK expected (perhaps) some follow through on warmer noises regarding Chequers being a move in the right direction at Salzburg.

Yesterday TM rejected the new EU border approach, perhaps too curtly?

Is today's unexpected intransigence simply a negotiating response to that? A flexing of muscle?

Certainly downing st are spinning it as an "elbowing" and that a blow up was going to happen at some point.

Is Tusk reminding May that (until today) the EU 27 contained more of her supporters than the Carlton does?

How can you possibly negotiate with someone who is offering you deal that they can't deliver?

Zubeneschamali

Mr.Nice Guy wrote: »

As disastrous as May is, she's better than the extremists getting their hands on the wheel.

What, Boris has something worse up his sleeve than a March 2019 chaotic hard brexit?

kowtow

Mr.Nice Guy wrote: »

Two words: Boris Johnson.

He takes over and he passes the buck for all the flak that will come to those that came before him.

The man sees himself as Churchill reincarnated and would see this as his post-Chamberlain moment.

As disastrous as May is, she's better than the extremists getting their hands on the wheel.

Perhaps they have decided that the risk of Boris has passed it's peak.

kowtow

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

How can you possibly negotiate with someone who is offering you deal that they can't deliver?

In what respect?

She could have delivered electronics in NI, one way or another, perhaps with a bit of democratic consent or the option to perform equivalent checks on the Irish / EU side as well (to protect the UK market).

She couldn't deliver Chequers but that wouldn't matter because the money would have been paid and the withdrawal agreement done. Brexit would have been de-dramatised.

Beechwoodspark

Infini wrote: »

The situation is already unstable because they cant agree. I said it before only the serious threat of a no-Deal scenario playing out will ever make them cop the hell on at this point. They need the drop of the pound, companies leaving and the clear consequences of THEIR foolishness that they ignored the warnings of in order for them to abort this. At least if it happens now theres a chance of reversal unlike it happening at the last minute when its too late.

I hate to think it’s gone this far but At this stage they need a damn good fright to get a bit of sober reality into them

Professor Moriarty

kowtow wrote: »

In what respect?

She could have delivered electronics in NI, one way or another, perhaps with a bit of democratic consent or the option to perform equivalent checks on the Irish / EU side as well (to protect the UK market).

She couldn't deliver Chequers but that wouldn't matter because the money would have been paid and the withdrawal agreement done. Brexit would have been de-dramatised.

So if she wasn't offering Chequers, though it was all she offered, because she can't deliver it, exactly what deal should the EU have be considering right now? This is Alice In Wonderland stuff.

demfad

kowtow wrote: »

In what respect?

She could have delivered electronics in NI, one way or another, perhaps with a bit of democratic consent or the option to perform equivalent checks on the Irish / EU side as well (to protect the UK market).

There is no electronic border solution currently or potentially available right now that doesn't involve vehicles and/or livestock being stopped and checked i.e a physical border. This is the crux of their problem. They cannot deliver this, they never could.

kowtow

demfad wrote: »

There is no electronic border solution currently or potentially available right now that doesn't involve vehicles and/or livestock being stopped and checked i.e a physical border. This is the crux of their problem. They cannot deliver this, they never could.

I don't think the EU has a problem with an electronic border in the Irish sea?

Rhineshark

kowtow wrote: »

I don't think the EU has a problem with an electronic border in the Irish sea?

I bet you'd find they do. The offer was that checks could be at British ports with British customs officers, facilitated by "technology" if anyone can define such usefully.

Not "an electronic border in the sea" whatever that is.

Junkyard Tom

kowtow wrote: »

I don't think the EU has a problem with an electronic border in the Irish sea?

The DUP do. They could accept the north acting as a special economic zone, essentially a bridge between Britain and the EU, but they're so insecure in their 'Britishness' they're terrified of any divergence. The DUP are shooting a gift-horse in the head.

They deserve nothing more than a pro-UI border poll.

Mr.Nice Guy

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

What, Boris has something worse up his sleeve than a March 2019 chaotic hard brexit?

Boris doesn't care. He reportedly said a few months back, "f*ck business" when their concerns were raised. A chaotic hard Brexit won't affect him or his friends and any public anger can be passed on to May for doing it all wrong, and what they will portray as an inflexible EU that was asking for the impossible - to dislocate a part of the UK, as they will describe it.

Let's also remember a chaotic hard Brexit is chaotic for Ireland too, and will likely necessitate the Irish government having to introduce a hard border, which will conveniently absolve the Brexiteers of having to sort out that mess since we will be the ones cleaning it up for them.

This is what I don't get about the EU strategy today. Chequers was never going to work and was always going to have to be shot down - but why do it now? Why not wait until after the Tory conference and deny her enemies the opportunity to stick the knife in? Rees-Mogg, Johnson, Fox and co. are very happy with where this leaves May. They will now further the narrative that No Deal is the only reasonable strategy against Brussels intransigence. I suspect the DUP's Sammy Wilson and Nigel Dodds will soon be banging the drum about the bullies in Brussels.

The UK isn't Greece. It's a dangerous game imo to expect common sense to prevail when the country at the moment is gripped by nationalistic fever. Many will see this as their "finest hour" moment. Stiff upper lip, chaps. We've been through worse than this. If Adolf couldn't break us, what makes Mr Barnier think he will etc. It sounds daft, and it is, but this is where they're at now. Question Time tonight will be full of it.

Imreoir2

kowtow wrote: »

I don't think the EU has a problem with an electronic border in the Irish sea?

I think the border on the Irish sea would still involve some elements of physical checks. Some elements could be delt with eletronically, but not all. That is my understanding at least.

brickster69

kowtow wrote: »

demfad wrote: »

There is no electronic border solution currently or potentially available right now that doesn't involve vehicles and/or livestock being stopped and checked i.e a physical border. This is the crux of their problem. They cannot deliver this, they never could.

I don't think the EU has a problem with an electronic border in the Irish sea?

Exactly, the border is just being used as leverage. They have ruled it out now, so now it looks like hard Brexit and the EU will insist on a hard border in Ireland.

kowtow

Imreoir2 wrote: »

I think the border on the Irish sea would still involve some elements of physical checks. Some elements could be delt with eletronically, but not all. That is my understanding at least.

Absolutely. But getting on ships involves checks anyway, for a variety of reasons.

What I am saying is that with a following wind May could probably have sold something based on the EU offer yesterday - and on a really good day she might somehow have got it past the DUP.

Instead she turned it down a little bit curtly for my taste, instead of making warm noises and promising to run it up the flagpole.

In return the EU drowned her Chequers puppy in a barrel before she could take it to the Tory conference.

At least that's my reading of it.

But the puzzle is that I - like everyone else - thought the point of Chequers was that it could be talked about further down the line which would have suited the EU perfectly. All they want is the Irish border safe and the money paid over.

https://twitter.com/ShippersUnbound/status/1042812796193447938?s=19

Pretty nasty slap in the face for all Unionists in NI.

Junkyard Tom

brickster69 wrote: »

Exactly, the border is just being used as leverage.

1. By who?

2. For what?

Junkyard Tom

Deleted User wrote: »

https://twitter.com/ShippersUnbound/status/1042812796193447938?s=19

Pretty nasty slap in the face for all Unionists in NI.

This is the tightrope the DUP are walking - they risk the British public blaming them for a disastrous Brexit.

Let's see what way the corporate media treat the issue in the days to come.

brickster69

Junkyard Tom wrote: »

Deleted User wrote: »

https://twitter.com/ShippersUnbound/status/1042812796193447938?s=19

Pretty nasty slap in the face for all Unionists in NI.

This is the tightrope the DUP are walking - they risk the British public blaming them for a disastrous Brexit.

Let's see what way the corporate media treat the issue in the days to come.

Works both ways, who is the Irish people going to blame for a disastrous Brexit ?