Brexit discussion thread IV

Leroy42

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

There is that danger. However, the most shrill voices - Johnson, Hunt, Davis, Mogg etc. - do not represent a majority of people. They can indulge in craw-thumping rhetoric because they don't need to offer a viable alternative. The Tory press (and the conference) loves their rhetoric so they get far more visibility than they deserve. Their Little Englander ideology may blind them to the looming cliff edge but maybe there are still enough sane politicians inside and outside the Tory party to prevent a hard Brexit.

I agree with the point, but I think you may be underestimating the number of people that agree with the likes of JRM, Boris etc.

Whilst support for remain/2nd ref has grown, it is nothing like overwhelming and these guys are not simply speaking for the fun of it. After all, Boris in particular, wants the PM job and is positioning himself to that end.

There is a sizeable amount of Labour supporters that want out as well, so it is not just the Tory faithful they are talking to.

Professor Moriarty

Leroy42 wrote: »

I agree with the point, but I think you may be underestimating the number of people that agree with the likes of JRM, Boris etc.

Whilst support for remain/2nd ref has grown, it is nothing like overwhelming and these guys are not simply speaking for the fun of it. After all, Boris in particular, wants the PM job and is positioning himself to that end.

There is a sizeable amount of Labour supporters that want out as well, so it is not just the Tory faithful they are talking to.

That's true if you take a binary perspective. However, just like the referendum, people who are Remain know exactly what they are getting. Those who are Leave have disparate views on what exactly that means. Despite the rhetoric and for instance, if the choice became a hard Brexit next March or a fudge of some kind then I think a sizeable majority would want to avoid a hard Brexit.

J Mysterio

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

No it's not okay. However, as an Irish citizen, all I can do is look on in amazement and offer my opinion here. Similarly, the way forward for Ireland and the EU is to maintain a calm and clear perspective. Reacting to ideologues spouting pompous rubbish isn't going to help. In fact, 'outsiders' offering counterarguments to their rubbish will feed their Little Englander lies. Better to see the rhetoric for what it is and give it the appropriate credence while continuing to engage with Britain with civil reality

This article covers some of the reaction to Hunt's comments quite well, from former UK FSec to UK diplomats to European Commision spokesperson to EU leaders.

Consensus: Hunt's comments ignorant and offensive. Standard.

Professor Moriarty

J Mysterio wrote: »

This article covers some of the reaction to Hunt's comments quite well, from former UK FSec to UK diplomats to European Commision spokesperson to EU leaders.

Consensus: Hunt's comments ignorant and offensive. Standard.

They are offensive and have been responded to in the right way. There is nothing to be gained in engaging with Little Englander rhetoric with anything other than polite facts. Anything else will be seized upon as evidence of perfidious Europe.

Professor Moriarty

correct horse battery staple wrote: »

What should we care as to what their media says? I do not agree with this softly softly approach towards extremism.

We seen it with Trump's election, where he was constantly given the benefit of doubt, and look how that ended up, a lot worse than anyone could have expected.

No! bull**** and lies should be called out early and called out often. If you give them an inch they will take a mile.

So you think that the EU should respond with threats, insults and lies?

Nate--IRL--

correct horse battery staple wrote: »

Nope no need to go down to their level, however I think the EU should walk away

Nothing to be gained from that - simply run down the Clock. Normal Discussion can then resume after a dose of reality is delivered.


Nate

Dymo

correct horse battery staple wrote: »

I suspect the fastest way for EU to get a deal is to walk away and let their house of cards collapse under the weight of their contradictions and lies.

I think that might be the only thing possible that the EU can do because the UK government seems to be extremely confident that the EU are afraid to walk away, if chequers was shot down so many times why are they still negotiating it.

Maybe if there was a clear threat of a no deal, the UK might act.

Leroy42 wrote: »

Whilst support for remain/2nd ref has grown, it is nothing like overwhelming and these guys are not simply speaking for the fun of it.

I can understand that people were lied to in the run up to the referendum, but since then a lot of the truth has come out and it's made little to no difference to the will of the people.

Before the Referendum poll June 2016
52% remain

10th of August 2018 poll
53% remain

http://www.thejournal.ie/yougov-poll-brexit-4173206-Aug2018/

I believe that's the reason why Teresa is sticking to her plans the will of the people.

Professor Moriarty

Nate--IRL-- wrote: »

Nothing to be gained from that - simply run down the Clock. Normal Discussion can then resume after a dose of reality is delivered.


Nate

Exactly. Maintain composure and respond with reality. What Britain makes of that is their own business.

Leroy42

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

Exactly. Maintain composure and respond with reality. What Britain makes of that is their own business.

But on the present course, it seems increasingly likely that it will result in a crash out on the basis that the UK are continually talking themselves into a smaller corner.

If the EU came out with the same type of speech that TM gave the day after Salzburg, effectively saying that unless TM makes significant moves toward a real deal, that the only options available are Canada, Norway or no deal and that the backstop will be legally followed up on, that might bring some dose of reality to the markets and the UK business sector that might, just might, leave them no room to deny reality.

Of course they will cry and blame the EU, but they are doing that already. Playing nicely, nicely has, IMO only resulted in hardening the UK position, the exact opposite of what it was intended to do.

Surely it worth trying something different rather than simply sleepwalking into a crash out?

Spook_ie

J Mysterio wrote: »

This article covers some of the reaction to Hunt's comments quite well, from former UK FSec to UK diplomats to European Commision spokesperson to EU leaders.

Consensus: Hunt's comments ignorant and offensive. Standard.

Though his comparison to Soviet Union Prisons is offensive, I interpret his meaning as likely to mean that the EU is a cage, maybe a gilded cage but still a cage.

Rhineshark

Spook_ie wrote: »

Though his comparison to Soviet Union Prisons is offensive, I interpret his meaning as likely to mean that the EU is a cage, maybe a gilded cage but still a cage.

Nah, this is the same lot that goes on at length about being a colony and vassal state of the EU with no irony.

That they haven't the remotest clue what they are talking about has sadly never stopped any of them from talking about it.

swampgas

Spook_ie wrote: »

Though his comparison to Soviet Union Prisons is offensive, I interpret his meaning as likely to mean that the EU is a cage, maybe a gilded cage but still a cage.

A cage that they can leave any time they like?

Perhaps golden handcuffs would be a better analogy?

lawred2

Spook_ie wrote: »

Though his comparison to Soviet Union Prisons is offensive, I interpret his meaning as likely to mean that the EU is a cage, maybe a gilded cage but still a cage.

Well if he wanted to say cage - he could have simply said cage.

These are planned speeches, written and proof read many times. These are not off the cuff remarks. Words have meanings and politicians know this.

Not sure why you think his preordained speech needs a more generous alternate interpretation to the one that was quite clearly intended.

Kermit.de.frog

Bloomberg reporting now that UK to concede in new offerto EU close alignment on goods between north and south and some regulatory checks in the Irish sea at British ports.

They still want an all UK aspect for the backstop. This is not acceptable to the EU...

Rhineshark

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

Bloomberg reporting now that UK to concede in new offerto EU close alignment on goods between north and south and some regulatory checks in the Irish sea at British ports.

They still want an all UK aspect for the backstop. This is not acceptable to the EU...

Hm...I'll believe it when they get EU agreement AND transpose it into UK law. Done with Tory flappy mouth noises meaning anything.

Kermit.de.frog

Sterling surging now on reports of this compromise.

The Brexiteers and the DUP both will be unhappy though!

listermint

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

Sterling surging now on reports of this compromise.

The Brexiteers and the DUP both will be unhappy though!

The brexiteers will be unhappy not because it North will be split'ish' from the mainland but because the North will get special treatment that they want the entire UK to have whilst still exiting.

Its never been about the Union. Its about England

EdgeCase

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

Sterling surging now on reports of this compromise.

The Brexiteers and the DUP both will be unhappy though!

Sure it'll be plummeting again in a few days when such arrangements are shot down.

I don't think the currency traders are particularly useful barometers or how stupid Brexit is on any given day.

Fundamentally, the UK Government does not have any mandate to push through with a NI deal because the DUP has them over a barrel.

It simply will unravel.

Short of a general election, this is going to be a chaotic Brexit as this infinite loop just continues to go around and around.

Kermit.de.frog

https://twitter.com/C_Barraud/status/1046742173834760193

Arlene on the phone in 3,2,1...

Peregrinus

Leroy42 wrote: »

But on the present course, it seems increasingly likely that it will result in a crash out on the basis that the UK are continually talking themselves into a smaller corner.

If the EU came out with the same type of speech that TM gave the day after Salzburg, effectively saying that unless TM makes significant moves toward a real deal, that the only options available are Canada, Norway or no deal and that the backstop will be legally followed up on, that might bring some dose of reality to the markets and the UK business sector that might, just might, leave them no room to deny reality.

Of course they will cry and blame the EU, but they are doing that already. Playing nicely, nicely has, IMO only resulted in hardening the UK position, the exact opposite of what it was intended to do.

Surely it worth trying something different rather than simply sleepwalking into a crash out?

They're not "simply sleepwalking into a crash-out". More plain speaking from the EU at this point, coupled with a threat to "legally follow up" on the backstop (there's no backstop without a withdrawal agreement, so what does this even mean?) would feed straight into the "bullying, intransigent EU" line that the Brexiters are spinning at the moment. This would be very stupid.

HMG knows exactly what the score is. They do not need to be told again, and particularly not in a way which will make it more difficult for them to move.

We are in the party confererence. All kinds of nonsense, much of it offensive, was always going to be spouted at the party conference, and HMG was never going to risk moving in the smallest degree until after the party conference. There is no need to react intemperately, therefore, when all kinds of offensive guff is trotted out, and HMG appears frozen; this is exactly where we expect to be.

It's notable that much of the guff is from nonentities; either anonymous delegates or angry backbenchers like IDS. The only statement that has attracted any pushback is Raab's incredibly ill-judged Soviet Union comparison*, and that has mostly attracted push-back from the former Warsaw Pact countries that the UK had until Salzburg hoped would press its case in the European Council. So, a bit of an own goal there.

Certainly no need for a walk-out by the EU at this point. That would definitely make a withdrawal agreement impossiable, and a crash-out Brexit therefore inevitable. Why would we want to do that? Keep talking; that keeps open th space in which the UK can move, if it going to move. If it doesn't move, and a crash-out results, well, we're no worse off than if we walked out, plus it would be slightly less easier for the UK to blame us.

* On edit: Trellheim rightly points out in post #8612 that it was Jeremy Hunt, not Dominic Raab, who made this comparison.

Infini

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

https://twitter.com/C_Barraud/status/1046742173834760193

Arlene on the phone in 3,2,1...

The responce should be simple: Go ahead and you take the flak for both the collapse of government and you take the fall for Hard Brexit.

Rhineshark

Peregrinus wrote: »

They're not "simply sleepwalking into a crash-out". More plain speaking from the EU at this point, coupled with a threat to "legally follow up" on the backstop (there's no backstop without a withdrawal agreement, so what does this even mean?) would feed straight into the "bullying, intransigent EU" line that the Brexiters are spinning at the moment. This would be very stupid.

HMG knows exactly what the score is. They do not need to be told again, and particularly not in a way which will make it more difficult for them to move.

We are in the party confererence. All kinds of nonsense, much of it offensive, was always going to be spouted at the party conference, and HMG was never going to risk moving in the smallest degree until after the party conference. There is no need to react intemperately, therefore, when all kinds of offensive guff is trotted out, and HMG appears frozen; this is exactly where we expect to be.

It's notable that much of the guff is from nonentities; either anonymous delegates or angry backbenchers like IDS. The only statement that has attracted any pushback is Raab's incredibly ill-judged Soviet Union comparison, and that has mostly attracted push-back from the former Warsaw Pact countries that the UK had until Salzburg hoped would press its case in the European Council. So, a bit of an own goal there.

Certainly no need for a walk-out by the EU at this point. That would definitely make a withdrawal agreement impossiable, and a crash-out Brexit therefore inevitable. Why would we want to do that? Keep talking; that keeps open th space in which the UK can move, if it going to move. If it doesn't move, and a crash-out results, well, we're no worse off than if we walked out, plus it would be slightly less easier for the UK to blame us.

While fair enough it is very annoying that once again and as throughout the EU inc Ireland have to be reasonable, patient "No Boris, we don't set fire to people's hair, Jeremy, put that pen down and stop jabbing Theresa in the face with it.." Because the second any Tory's precious feeling is hurt the EU are back to being a cross between the USSR, Nazi Germany and the forces of the Antichrist.

While they can say whatever the hell they like, insult anyone and everyone in the vicinity, publically say they are negotiating in bad faith and generally act like a set of screaming toddlers in the supermarket sweetie aisle with no come-uppance.

Mind you, it's the same in the US and basically right across the alt-reality set. The sneauxflaykism is just unreal.

_Puma_

Infini wrote: »

The responce should be simple: Go ahead and you take the flak for both the collapse of government and you take the fall for Hard Brexit.

This...the DUP are idiots but they may prove to be useful idiots for TM's exit. These people will do absolutely anything to avoid another General Election, TM included. She knows her time is up after this Conference. All the hallmarks of a carefully choreographed changing of the guard in Tory leadership and a pivot towards hard brexit I think. Wait for the headlines of "betrayal!" and "TM has to go".

FrancieBrady

Infini wrote: »

The responce should be simple: Go ahead and you take the flak for both the collapse of government and you take the fall for Hard Brexit.

Followed by...'did you not realise you would be shafted ultimately? Take your soup and go try and spin it to your people that this isn't another sellout of our beloved unionist bretren, bye Arlene'.

Imreoir2

Leroy42 wrote: »

But on the present course, it seems increasingly likely that it will result in a crash out on the basis that the UK are continually talking themselves into a smaller corner.

If the EU came out with the same type of speech that TM gave the day after Salzburg, effectively saying that unless TM makes significant moves toward a real deal, that the only options available are Canada, Norway or no deal and that the backstop will be legally followed up on, that might bring some dose of reality to the markets and the UK business sector that might, just might, leave them no room to deny reality.

Of course they will cry and blame the EU, but they are doing that already. Playing nicely, nicely has, IMO only resulted in hardening the UK position, the exact opposite of what it was intended to do.

Surely it worth trying something different rather than simply sleepwalking into a crash out?

The EU has a reputation to maintain, that the British have decided to flush their's down the toilet does not mean the EU should follow them down the drain. It is important that the EU maintains the perception of serious, professional, good faith negioation by acting that way in this and every other negioatation they are engaged in. The Brexit deal is not the only deal that matters to the EU, there are a dozen other deals being worked on at the same time and the EU can't afford to be tarnished by giving into frustration with the British.

At the end of the day the job of the women and men leading these talks on behalf of the EU is to represent the best interests of the EU members and they have to answer to those members for actions that damage the reputation of the EU and damage the ability of the EU to do good deals around the world in the future.

mrbrianj

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Followed by...'did you not realise you would be shafted ultimately? Take your soup and go try and spin it to your people that this isn't another sellout of our beloved unionist bretren, bye Arlene'.

I think Arlene would gladly take responsibility for a hard brexit as long as it led to a hard border.

As the DUP MLA from Antrim (Jim McAllister?) said on BBC NI - We wont put up a border, But the EU will have to force Ireland to put up one.

I know this is venturing into the realms of conspiracy theory - but with the possibility of a changing demographic in the north, in the not that distant future the Unionists electorate may be outnumbered. So the opportunity for the DUP to dump the GFA now gets rid of the prospect of a future border poll.

They will put up with the Brexit hardships once they are getting one over the other tribe.

Winters

"What we're not going to do is see the United Kingdom carved up into two separate customs regimes... that is just not on the table. Frankly, I think it's outrageous even to contemplate it,"

"We need to see a bit less dry legalism and dry dogmatism and a bit more of the flexibility that we have demonstrated in our white paper,"

"If the EU want a deal, they need to get serious. And they need to do it now,"

Dominic Rabb today. I hope Monsieur Barnier is saving these.

Junkyard Tom

mrbrianj wrote: »

So the opportunity for the DUP to dump the GFA now gets rid of the prospect of a future border poll.

Does it though? Even without the GFA consistent polls showing a majority of people wanting Irish unification would signal the beginning of the end of NI. What would be Britain's excuse for denying it?

wexie

Winters wrote: »

Dominic Rabb today. I hope Monsieur Barnier is saving these.

Only half heard it but I think they were quoting him on the last word today, something along the lines that a border wouldn't be that big of a deal as you can already buy a pint in Belfast using euro's and Dublin using pounds....



Matt Cooper wasn't really all that impressed and about as baffled as me that this guy is Brexit secretary

(I'll have to go through the podcast now cause I'm not sure it was him actually).

I clearly didn't hear it properly (was trying to make dinner and help with homework, it was David Davis : https://www.joe.ie/news/david-davis-pound-dublin-642540)

trellheim

Wasn’t it Jeremy Hunt not Dom Raab with the Soviet Union/EU comparison Peregrinus ?