Brexit discussion thread IV

Dymo

Econ__ wrote: »

As the clock ticks and once it becomes clear to the UK that there will be no 'mini deals' to mitigate the worst effects of no deal - they will know they could not survive it for long and would end up humiliatingly returning to the negotiating table within a week.

But that's the big question will the EU hold out, there is already talks of mini deals being done for the airline industry in case of a no deal and more talks of mini deals being done between countries in the EU and the UK for the transport of goods.

Winters

swampgas wrote: »

I would like to believe that. But IMO the UK government is so fractured and dysfunctional, that even if the PM+cabinet decide to take whatever the EU offer, Parliament might vote it down anyway.

Theere isn't a lot of time left - weeks perhaps - for the UK to get its act together, and decide what it wants, one way or the other.

I would like to believe that also but it doesn't take into account the bloody red hand of the DUP.

swampgas

Sam Russell wrote: »

That is General Election time then. Gov cannot command a majority, go to the country - again.

Indeed. But there is no guarantee that the outcome of a general election would be any better. Perhaps if the Tories managed to get a majority, they would be able to ditch the DUP and cut NI loose. If the government doesn't collapse again. Or if Labour win it I can see them implode as the party fights against their leader, who (IMO) is a hard Brexiter underneath it all.

The power is with the hard Brexiters, in Labour and the Tory party, as all they have to to is run down the clock.

.

Enzokk

Dymo wrote: »

But that's the big question will the EU hold out, there is already talks of mini deals being done for the airline industry in case of a no deal and more talks of mini deals being done between countries in the EU and the UK for the transport of goods.

What mini deals in the airline industry? I have only seen EASA telling UK airlines they need to apply for licences as other third countries do after Brexit in case there is no deal. If they haven't got the paperwork sorted with EASA then I guess on 30 March they will not have a licence with EASA and therefor cannot operate to the EU.

Water John

There is little reason to believe that Labour would implode. Most Ministers tend to focus on their own brief and they effectively have to let the other Ministers at the Cabinet look after their briefs.

swampgas

Water John wrote: »

There is little reason to believe that Labour would implode. Most Ministers tend to focus on their own brief and they effectively have to let the other Ministers at the Cabinet look after their briefs.

They have no unified position on Brexit. They have, if anything been avoiding the subject. At the party conference they couldn't agree whether there should be another referendum or not, and if there were, what options it should offer.

How long do you think it would take for them, while in power, to thrash that out, assuming they can even agree a common position? I imagine they would find themselves without a consensus and paralysed just like the Tories.

Dyr

swampgas wrote: »

Indeed. But there is no guarantee that the outcome of general election would be any better. Perhaps if the Tories managed to get a majority, they would be able to ditch the DUP and cut NI loose. If the government doesn't collapse again. Or if Labour win it I can see them implode as the party fights against their leader, who (IMO) is a hard Brexiter underneath it all.

The power is with the hard Brexiters, in Labour and the Tory party, as all they have to to is run down the clock.

If May had the bottle and survives the next month then she could cut a soft deal that the non Brexit factions of the Labour and Conservative parties would carry through the UK Parliament. There is not a Brexit majority in Parliament IMO but the party lines make for a de facto one.

EdgeCase

PopePalpatine wrote: »

What I can't wrap my head around is that somehow, someone thought a clause named after one of Britain's most despotic rulers is still palatable in an effectively secular, pluralist constitutional monarchy.

For the same reason they didn't know they'd an EU land border and half them don't know Ireland's a different country and think that they'll be welcomed with open arms by all of their former colonial conquests who miss their charming armies who were only there to run tea parties and sports days.

A significant % of the UK population has a revisionist, pink tinted view of history and that particularly applies to monarchy. It's not deliberate, it's just that they seem to be taught none of the negative aspects of their history, or at least they're learning that from non-academic sources.

Water John

If anyone puts down a motion that they stay in the CU and SM, in contrast to a No Deal situation, it will sail through Parliament. It could be sponsored across party lines, if that is the best option.

Zubeneschamali

Water John wrote: »

It could be sponsored across party lines, if that is the best option.

It could be, but it won't, because Labour would rather bring down the Government than force a soft brexit and leave the Tories in power.

Inquitus

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

It could be, but it won't, because Labour would rather bring down the Government than force a soft brexit and leave the Tories in power.

I assume the Tories would then ditch May in short order, it would be hard to replace her without going to the country you'd think, so they could perhaps get the best of both worlds.

lawred2

EdgeCase wrote: »

For the same reason they didn't know they'd an EU land border and half them don't know Ireland's a different country and think that they'll be welcomed with open arms by all of their former colonial conquests who miss their charming armies who were only there to run tea parties and sports days.

A significant % of the UK population has a revisionist, pink tinted view of history and that particularly applies to monarchy. It's not deliberate, it's just that they seem to be taught none of the negative aspects of their history, or at least they're learning that from non-academic sources.

I doubt the school curriculum is exhaustive in it's coverage of the empire

BonnieSituation

PopePalpatine wrote: »

What I can't wrap my head around is that somehow, someone thought a clause named after one of Britain's most despotic rulers is still palatable in an effectively secular, pluralist constitutional monarchy.

I'm onboard with you in general. And yes on the face of it the UK is a bastion of effective secularism...

But it still has unelected religious leaders in its upper house, a queen as head of an established state church and a prohibition on non-Anglicans being First Lord of the Treasury...

Bit Iranian there alright

---

I only say this though that you can become easily aghast when you start digging at the nonsense of British "tradition" and how its allowed to pervade in an effectively secular, pluralist constitutional monarchy.

And when His Holiness stated that above I just started thinking about it. Oh Britain!

BonnieSituation

lawred2 wrote: »

I doubt the school curriculum is exhaustive in it's coverage of the empire

I think all of us in our contact with our brethren from the Sceptred Isle can say without qualification that this is true.

Water John

Corbyn has said he will support a deal that keeps the UK in the CU and possibly the SM. I don't see Labour voting against any proposal for same in Parliament.

Kermit.de.frog

Brexit European Council has been set for 17th Oct.

End game now. 2 weeks to solve border issue...

flutered

Econ__ wrote: »

swampgas wrote: »

From the Guardian's updates just now:
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/blog/live/2018/oct/03/tory-conference-may-announces-fuel-duty-freeze-despite-treasury-concerns-about-800m-cost-politics-live


As someone else described earlier, she can see that No Deal Brexit gets her out of the impossible situation she has engineered for herself.  It doesn't matter if the country is destroyed as long as she can avoid having to lose face to a bunch of foreigners.

There won't be a 'no deal'.

Raab confirmed that if the EU didn't cooperate in that scenario, no deal would be 'intolerable'.

The EU27 + the Commission know this, which is why they will cooperate with one another to ensure that each of them does not make plans to strike mini bilateral deals with the UK in order to mitigate the worst effects of a no deal scenario.

This is clearly the Commission's strategy (see airline industry criticising their 'block' on aviation talks, member state ambassadors banned from attending no deal briefings in London etc.)

As the clock ticks and once it becomes clear to the UK that there will be no 'mini deals' to mitigate the worst effects of no deal - they will know they could not survive it for long and would end up humiliatingly returning to the negotiating table within a week.

Many in the UK don't know this yet (the Westminster bubble is a resilient echo chamber) but there will come a point when reality bites. And at that point they will not contemplate leaving the EU without a deal.

unless a no deal is the objective, then it will not trouble them

flutered

Econ__ wrote: »

swampgas wrote: »

From the Guardian's updates just now:
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/blog/live/2018/oct/03/tory-conference-may-announces-fuel-duty-freeze-despite-treasury-concerns-about-800m-cost-politics-live


As someone else described earlier, she can see that No Deal Brexit gets her out of the impossible situation she has engineered for herself.  It doesn't matter if the country is destroyed as long as she can avoid having to lose face to a bunch of foreigners.

There won't be a 'no deal'.

Raab confirmed that if the EU didn't cooperate in that scenario, no deal would be 'intolerable'.

The EU27 + the Commission know this, which is why they will cooperate with one another to ensure that each of them does not make plans to strike mini bilateral deals with the UK in order to mitigate the worst effects of a no deal scenario.

This is clearly the Commission's strategy (see airline industry criticising their 'block' on aviation talks, member state ambassadors banned from attending no deal briefings in London etc.)

As the clock ticks and once it becomes clear to the UK that there will be no 'mini deals' to mitigate the worst effects of no deal - they will know they could not survive it for long and would end up humiliatingly returning to the negotiating table within a week.

Many in the UK don't know this yet (the Westminster bubble is a resilient echo chamber) but there will come a point when reality bites. And at that point they will not contemplate leaving the EU without a deal.

unless a no deal is the objective, then it will not trouble them

Sam Russell wrote: »

swampgas wrote: »

I would like to believe that.  But IMO the UK government is so fractured and dysfunctional, that even if the PM+cabinet decide to take whatever the EU offer, Parliament might vote it down anyway.  

Theere isn't a lot of time left  - weeks perhaps - for the UK to get its act together, and decide what it wants, one way or the other.

That is General Election time then.  Gov cannot command a majority, go to the country - again.

the torys will not go to the country until 2020, unless the unthinkable happens

flutered

lawred2 wrote: »

J Mysterio wrote: »

Comments from Arlene:

“There cannot be a border down the Irish Sea, a differential between Northern Ireland and the rest of the UK,” Ms Foster told the BBC on Tuesday. The interview was aired on Wednesday.

“The red line is blood red,” she said.

Way to take the rhetoric down a notch. 'Blood red' - nice.

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/politics/dup-leader-arlene-foster-our-red-line-is-blood-red-1.3650080

Imagine being so hateful or believing/knowing that such hateful angry rhetoric is what those around you want to hear..

Where are we going with all this only back to the seventies..

which ties in with corbyns 60's view for britan and moggs victorian view, are there 10 politicians in the uk with a view for the future

Anthracite

BonnieSituation wrote: »

a prohibition on non-Anglicans being First Lord of the Treasury...

This particular bit - I can't any evidence for.

ancapailldorcha

The First Lord of the Treasury is also the Prime Minister.

serfboard

Was watching a couple of minutes (that's all I could stand) of a debate on France 24 last night about Brexit. They had a fella on from London called Andre Walker - any of the Brexit watchers here come across him before?

Apparently he writes for a website called the New York Observer, owned by Jared Kushner.

Anyway, this Brextremist kept shouting down everyone else on the panel, and I eventually turned it off. But not before I heard him say that by wanting to keep NI in the CU/SM, the EU is trying to annex NI and threatening us with Loyalist paramilitaries.

UsedToWait

serfboard wrote: »

..and threatening us with Loyalist paramilitaries.

Was Arlene's blood red line not the same threat, implicitly?

ancapailldorcha

In other news, Japan's ambassador to the UK, Koji Tsuruoka has warned that it will not be feasible for Japanese companies to continue to operate in the UK unless it can secure frictionless trade with the EU:

After a February meeting between U.K. Prime Minister Theresa May and 19 Japanese business chiefs, Tokyo’s ambassador to Britain warned what might happen if Brexit took an unfavorable turn for foreign investors. “No private company can continue operations” in the U.K. if it becomes unprofitable, Koji Tsuruoka told reporters on the steps of May’s Downing Street residence, after the premier pledged to pursue frictionless trade with the European Union. “It is as simple as that.”

Eight months later, as the risk of a no-deal Brexit looms larger and nearer, Japanese companies aren’t waiting around to find out whether May can deliver. Instead, a growing number of them are heeding Tsuruoka’s warning, shifting operations out of the U.K. or threatening to scale back if the country crashes out of the EU without a deal. May provided little in the way of reassurance Wednesday when she said at the Conservative Party Conference that “Britain isn’t afraid to leave with no deal if we have to.”

Toyota Motor Corp. said on Saturday that it might have to temporarily halt output at its plant in Derby, England, in the event of a so-called hard Brexit. Electronics maker Panasonic has moved its European headquarters from near London to Amsterdam, while the Japanese retailer of Muji products is mulling a similar relocation to Germany. Other companies, like robot maker Yaskawa Electric Corp., are choosing continental sites for new operations in order to stay close to European customers if Brexit creates trade hurdles.

It makes perfect sense when you consider how heavily reliant these firms are on JIT manufacturing twinned with how little progress has been achieved by the Conservatives in the negotiations. The article goes on to explain that Margaret Thatcher promoted the UK as a gateway to Europe in order to attract investment. It's a strategy which worked but the modern incarnation of the party is likely to undo it.

road_high

Manufacturing in the U.K. is absolutely tied in with EU supply chains and markets. Any disruption to this is economic insanity and May actually does recognize this ala a lot of her speech

murphaph

serfboard wrote: »

Was watching a couple of minutes (that's all I could stand) of a debate on France 24 last night about Brexit. They had a fella on from London called Andre Walker - any of the Brexit watchers here come across him before?

Apparently he writes for a website called the New York Observer, owned by Jared Kushner.

Anyway, this Brextremist kept shouting down everyone else on the panel, and I eventually turned it off. But not before I heard him say that by wanting to keep NI in the CU/SM, the EU is trying to annex NI and threatening us with Loyalist paramilitaries.

I saw that too. Lowest common denominator stuff from that chap.

swampgas

road_high wrote: »

Manufacturing in the U.K. is absolutely tied in with EU supply chains and markets. Any disruption to this is economic insanity and May actually does recognize this ala a lot of her speech

She might well recognise it, but she is powerless to actually do anything sensible about it. She must know this, but she refuses to accept it. She is being openly attacked, mocked and undermined by her own party - she has no authority.

A wiser or more principled politician would already have resigned, her position is completely untenable and has been since the last election.

That said, it's remarkable that she hasn't been replaced. Presumably the position of PM is currently such a poisoned chalice that even Boris Johnson is hesitating to take it.

A Dub in Glasgo

Enzokk wrote: »

Funny that they are quick to mention that there is a border already between NI and Ireland, currency and tax etc., but is very quick to not mention that there is a legal border as well between NI and GB. If it is easy to put up a border between Ireland and NI the same goes the other way, surely?

The other biggie is the difference in political party / referendum funding which has allowed the 'Dark Money' to the Tories from the DUP during the referendum to be kept secret

An Ciarraioch

One of the most worrying stats in today's Irish Times - 80% of new PSNI recruits are of a Protestant background, which can only exacerbate social divisions.

An Ciarraioch

One of the most worrying stats in today's Irish Times - 80% of new PSNI recruits are of a Protestant background, which can only exacerbate social divisions.