Brexit discussion thread IV

kowtow

Leroy42 wrote: »

But my understanding is that this deal, and I stress again that this is just my reading of the reports and this could be wrong, is that the UK would not be getting a deal like Turkey, but a frictionless deal, pretty close to what they currently have.

They would, though, be free from FoM and I would wager that they would also be free of many of the non product specific regulations such as working time, holidays, H&S etc etc.

I can see the immediate positive for the EU, but seems to be that the UK are getting pretty much everything they wanted whilst the EU are giving in on their core principles.

They still have to find a way around the de-facto jurisdiction of the ECJ (over goods regulation at least), and an answer to those who say that this will limit their ability to strike trade deals outside the EU umbrella.

Presumably there would be additional accords on labour conditions etc, state support to at least suggest a level playing field - and in fairness, the position today is level already by virtue of EU membership.

The biggest issue would be giving May enough ammunition to get past the "vassal state" accusations.

Is it fair to say that, whilst potentially an ideal solution for the UK, there are actually no other EU states (except ourselves maybe!) who would be in a position to make the most of a deal like this? That the danger of "encourager les autres" is less than it might otherwise be?

breatheme

road_high wrote: »

Where do Irish citizens stand re immigration? Lots of “UK citizens” in the North would have only Irish citizenship so how would that work in the U.K.- surely they can’t exclude their own citizens and by default us?

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

Both governments have said that the common Travel Area will remain in place.

Alright, this is a misconception that I see a lot and not just here, so I'll try to explain:

The reason Irish citizens have been allowed to live and work in the UK before the EU, and the reason it will remain so after Brexit is because of the section 2(1) of the Ireland Act 1949. When the UK leaves this provision will remain in place, unless it gets revoked. Unlikely, however, as it would genuinely cause issues in NI.

The CTA is not what entitles an Irish citizen to live in the UK or vice versa. The CTA merely allows for passportless travel within both territories. The CTA is messy because it is not a formal agreement. It doesn't actually exist on paper. It also means that the CTA can actually continue with custom posts in NI, checking goods but not passports.

It is essentially a "gentlemen's agreement" that kind of works but would, of course, actually be efficient if it were a formal agreement and the UK and Ireland had a unified visa policy and actually mirrored each other's passport checks.

Zubeneschamali

Leroy42 wrote: »

It strikes me as the EU losing its nerve and very much what the UK had planned for the whole time.

The EU has been saying for weeks that they plan to de-dramatize the border issues so that the UK can agree.

That does not mean compromising any principles, it means phrasing things so that May can do a victory dance outside #10 for the cameras.

Don't take any press release at face value during this process, especially ones announcing victory for the UK.

LuckyLloyd

Leroy42 wrote: »

What are peoples opinions of the BBC journalists Laura Kuenssberg?

I find a lot of her 'political' stuff to be little more than window dressing. For example, her article yesterday on BBC about May's speech spent more time telling us that she danced, joked and didn't cough and that therefore she was back.

It didn't deal with the fact that Chequers wasn't mentioned, that she had promised to end austerity without any actual plan, she had just admitted that she had failed in the last two years to tackle housing despite it being a main plank of her leadership. That overall, the Tory conference offered nothing to prospective voters save for we aren't labour and we need to stick together.

Not for the first time, I was left feeling that she is more a social journalist, more interested in the goings on within politics, than the politics themselves.

I think this is pretty common for politico journalists. They get embroiled in the "game" that is politics, the machinations and maneuvering where being in No 10 is the ultimate objective. We have our equivalents over here, Miriam Lord springs to mind. Brexit is an historical moment of great national import. The machinations of party politics would ideally be treated as an irrelevance at this point in time.

FreudianSlippers

Leroy42 wrote: »

So, from my initial, and thus could be wrong, understanding, the UK is going to get its CU for goods, keep services outside, and not have FoM.

That is a pretty good win for the UK, and basically what that asked for with Cameron but were turned down on the basis that the EU had rules.

This will, IMO, place in the UK is a significantly better position in terms of competition and thus have serious long terms effects on Ireland.

I don't think that's very likely - but if it was, I'd strongly consider Ireland taking the same deal and forging a trade partnership with the UK (joining the Commonwealth or something).

kowtow

FreudianSlippers wrote: »

I don't think that's very likely - but if it was, I'd strongly consider Ireland taking the same deal and forging a trade partnership with the UK (joining the Commonwealth or something).

I think you'd be in a minority.

We value the freedom of movement too much, not to mention the Euro.

First Up

FreudianSlippers wrote: »

I don't think that's very likely - but if it was, I'd strongly consider Ireland taking the same deal and forging a trade partnership with the UK (joining the Commonwealth or something).

If the UK enters a Customs Union with the EU (which the Brexiteers oppose but we'll see), then Ireland will have a "trade partnership" with them.

Why would we need to do anything else?

Nody

Leroy42 wrote: »

But my understanding is that this deal, and I stress again that this is just my reading of the reports and this could be wrong, is that the UK would not be getting a deal like Turkey, but a frictionless deal, pretty close to what they currently have.

They would, though, be free from FoM and I would wager that they would also be free of many of the non product specific regulations such as working time, holidays, H&S etc etc.

I can see the immediate positive for the EU, but seems to be that the UK are getting pretty much everything they wanted whilst the EU are giving in on their core principles.

They are not getting such a deal however; this has been clearly stated since day 1 and repeated today again. There is no splitting the four freedoms no matter how much UK politicans "leak" inside information stating that EU has agreed to it.

Enzokk

kowtow wrote: »

If it were an all UK CU (Turkey+?) then that wouldn't cross any DUP red lines surely?

Other than the one about leaving the single market and customs union.

First Up wrote: »

If the UK enters a Customs Union with the EU (which the Brexiteers oppose but we'll see), then Ireland will have a "trade partnership" with them.

Why would we need to do anything else?

Well the concern seems to be that the UK will get a deal where they are in a customs union that means no borders but they will not have any of the drawbacks of EU membership, FOM and checks if goods comply with regulations. If that is the case and the UK can be inside the EU without being in the EU then we should do the same. And France and Italy and Spain and Portugal and all others EU countries.

We are forgetting one very important thing, being in a (the) customs union will mean they will not be able to negotiate their own trade deals. Tell me again how much support that will get from the ERG and other Brexiteers?

Leroy42

As I said, this is only my impression based on what I have read, but the FT would be a fairly serious paper in this regard.

The EU will have to move on something, there is no way that Tm can deliver a No Brexit. So something will have to be seen to give.

FoM is probably the easiest, as in reality most of the stuff that people seem to want is already in the EU legislation and the UK were just not doing it. However, TM and the Tories made a big play out of saying that FoM would be ending forever, and that nationality would have no bearing. That goes directly against FoM within the EU.

I am putting 2 and 2 together and coming up with Brexit!

Leroy42

Enzokk wrote: »

We are forgetting one very important thing, being in a (the) customs union will mean they will not be able to negotiate their own trade deals. Tell me again how much support that will get from the ERG and other Brexiteers?

You are assuming that. It may be that the UK will be allowed to undertake the deals, with agreements on what additional controls will be put in place to ensure that it doesn't effect the EU. (I have no idea how that is even remotely possible though)

PokeHerKing

Leroy42 wrote:

As I said, this is only my impression based on what I have read, but the FT would be a fairly serious paper in this regard.

The FT article was a fairly typical "we've no new info" filler type article imo.

Absolutely nothing to suggest TM finally found that cherry.

Angry bird

Yep, it's clear that the FT article can be filed under fiction or just the latest divide and conquer tactics, from whatever dubious source. I fell for it.

kowtow

Leroy42 wrote: »

As I said, this is only my impression based on what I have read, but the FT would be a fairly serious paper in this regard.

The EU will have to move on something, there is no way that Tm can deliver a No Brexit. So something will have to be seen to give.

FoM is probably the easiest, as in reality most of the stuff that people seem to want is already in the EU legislation and the UK were just not doing it. However, TM and the Tories made a big play out of saying that FoM would be ending forever, and that nationality would have no bearing. That goes directly against FoM within the EU.

I am putting 2 and 2 together and coming up with Brexit!

Thinking about it further there is a way in which this makes sense as part of a backstop agreement.

The problem to date with the backstop is that instead of being a worst case fallback contingency, it is being debated as a default position. Part of the reason for this is that all the backstops that the EU have said they would countenance to date have been prejudicial to the UK (and therefore - the UK voter will say - there is no incentive for the EU to do anything but fall back on the backstop).

The all-in-the-CU approach is subtly different. On first blush it seems like a brexiteer nightmare (vassal state, no new trade agreements, etc. etc.).. but on another reading, as set out by Leroy above, it is actually a more uncomfortable position for Ireland and the EU than it is for the UK, at least if it is allowed to continue ad infinitum (it would presumably take time for GB to become a highly competitive thorn in the side of the EU)

So by remaining in the CU until a trade deal with accompanying electronic wonder border (or whatever) can eventually be agreed between the EU and the UK there is an incentive on all sides to move off the backstop, or - in transition - to avoid hitting it all together.

Which is, after all, what a backstop should be.

If I were a Tory MP, while broadly agreeing with a lot of what the ERG say about Chequers, I'd be willing to go down this route temporarily and vote for it on the basis that it solved the NI border question and left the door open for more sensible negotiation in a less fraught atmosphere in the future.

badtoro

Leroy42 wrote: »

The EU will have to move on something, there is no way that Tm can deliver a No Brexit. So something will have to be seen to give.

That's TM's problem. Let her sort it out on her side. The EU would be foolish to give Tories anything.

Enzokk

Angry bird wrote: »

Yep, it's clear that the FT article can be filed under fiction or just the latest divide and conquer tactics, from whatever dubious source. I fell for it.

I don't know if it is fiction, it seems that the UK has proposed a deal to try and get the EU to commit to a November summit. That deal according to the article is fraught with options that will not work.

Firstly, as a quote in the article succinctly puts it,

The Irish official added: “If [the UK is] accepting a customs union, what are they leaving? That’s the big question. If effectively they accept the customs union, they’re not leaving anything really.”

How long will this last for? Theresa May wants a time limited backstop, but the EU will not want to put a time limit on it. Then we have the problem in any case that this backstop will mean that the whole of the UK will be in a customs union, but that only NI will have regulations in line with the EU. So as mentioned above, will the DUP sign off on this when they have stated that they will not accept any divergence from the UK for any check or regulations.

But also this plan was tentatively approved, or at least given encouraging words from Ireland but we are not to the ones to please here. That will be the EU and Michel Barnier.

Zubeneschamali

Leroy42 wrote: »

The EU will have to move on something, there is no way that Tm can deliver a No Brexit. So something will have to be seen to give.

When May, Raab, the Telegraph and the BBC, and Barnier all suddenly announce that the EU have capitulated and May has beaten Johnny Foreigner, the EU will be seen (by the UK public) to have moved on something.

It will not matter that they have simply moved the words of last years offer around a bit.

The Brexiteers and the DUP will be very unhappy, which is why it has to happen at the very last minute, where it is this deal May agrees or No Deal.

Because despite all the waffle about No Deal being better than a bad deal, No Deal is actually worse than anything the UK has seen in 50 years, and they all know it.

prawnsambo

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

When May, Raab, the Telegraph and the BBC, and Barnier all suddenly announce that the EU have capitulated and May has beaten Johnny Foreigner, the EU will be seen (by the UK public) to have moved on something.

It will not matter that they have simply moved the words of last years offer around a bit.

This is so true, it's frightening.

Professor Moriarty

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

When May, Raab, the Telegraph and the BBC, and Barnier all suddenly announce that the EU have capitulated and May has beaten Johnny Foreigner, the EU will be seen (by the UK public) to have moved on something.

It will not matter that they have simply moved the words of last years offer around a bit.

The Brexiteers and the DUP will be very unhappy, which is why it has to happen at the very last minute, where it is this deal May agrees or No Deal.

Because despite all the waffle about No Deal being better than a bad deal, No Deal is actually worse than anything the UK has seen in 50 years, and they all know it.

I wouldn't underestimate the implications of the DUP feeling cheated and abandoned if a last minute deal was foisted on them. Nor the impact on Loyalism. The words in Foster's 'blood red' comment yesterday were carefully chosen. However much Brexiteers adhere to nationalistic ideology, they are mere children compared to diehard Loyalists.

EdgeCase

My view of it is they Tories think the DUP are a puppy that will do what it's told like the Lib Dems did. So far, they've behaved and towed the line.

Are the DUP going to show they're capable of having an independent position on this or are they going to go down as having sold Northern Ireland out for a bit of a bung, which may never be paid anyway.

If they destabilise Northern Ireland, they are 100% to blame for it. They have the power to put a stop to this. I don't think they even care one way or the other about Brexit from an ideological point of view. I mean within the EU unionist and loyalist rights are guaranteed and there's a peaceful, relatively prosperous status quo. Without the EU they're a regional backwater with a very angry nationalist community and entirely at the behest of a UK government that probably thinks very little of Northern Ireland.

Does Arleen want the legacy of having set Northern Ireland back 40 years and undoing the constitutional status quo?

Water John

I wouldn't be crediting the DUP with much political nous. They certainly couldn't think big. It took them all of 15 mins, according to McCrea to favour Brexit.

mayo.mick

It's going to start costing people money soon....

"British tourists travelling with Thomas Cook will not receive compensation or expenses should their flights be grounded as a result of a no-deal Brexit, the company has said."

https://www.theguardian.com/business/2018/oct/04/thomas-cook-compensation-no-deal-brexit-disruption

EdgeCase

There could be a rake of very cheap holidays for those of us who aren't in countries with grounded airlines!! Yay

Professor Moriarty

EdgeCase wrote: »

My view of it is they Tories think the DUP are a puppy that will do what it's told like the Lib Dems did. So far, they've behaved and towed the line.

Are the DUP going to show they're capable of having an independent position on this or are they going to go down as having sold Northern Ireland out for a bit of a bung, which may never be paid anyway.

If they destabilise Northern Ireland, they are 100% to blame for it. They have the power to put a stop to this. I don't think they even care one way or the other about Brexit from an ideological point of view. I mean within the EU unionist and loyalist rights are guaranteed and there's a peaceful, relatively prosperous status quo. Without the EU they're a regional backwater with a very angry nationalist community and entirely at the behest of a UK government that probably thinks very little of Northern Ireland.

Does Arleen want the legacy of having set Northern Ireland back 40 years and undoing the constitutional status quo?

The DUP are very adept at stoking up Loyalism and taking a small step back when it spills over. It's important to understand that being British and loyalty to the Crown are at the centre of their identity and have been for 300 years. You might as well ask a Frenchman to stop being French. The idea that the UK can turn around and tell them that their Britishness is being diluted and that they will simply accept with a bit of grumbling is plain wrong. If they don't have their identity they will feel that they have nothing and nothing to lose.

prawnsambo

EdgeCase wrote: »

My view of it is they Tories think the DUP are a puppy that will do what it's told like the Lib Dems did. So far, they've behaved and towed the line.

Are the DUP going to show they're capable of having an independent position on this or are they going to go down as having sold Northern Ireland out for a bit of a bung, which may never be paid anyway.

If they destabilise Northern Ireland, they are 100% to blame for it. They have the power to put a stop to this. I don't think they even care one way or the other about Brexit from an ideological point of view. I mean within the EU unionist and loyalist rights are guaranteed and there's a peaceful, relatively prosperous status quo. Without the EU they're a regional backwater with a very angry nationalist community and entirely at the behest of a UK government that probably thinks very little of Northern Ireland.

Does Arleen want the legacy of having set Northern Ireland back 40 years and undoing the constitutional status quo?

The biggest danger for the DUP has to be the possibility of an accelerated UI plebiscite. Polling (however inaccurate it may be) has been trending strongly towards support for a UI. That's the brexit dividend they wouldn't want to collect.

FrancieBrady

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

The DUP are very adept at stoking up Loyalism and taking a small step back when it spills over. It's important to understand that being British and loyalty to the Crown are at the centre of their identity and have been for 300 years. You might as well ask a Frenchman to stop being French. The idea that the UK can turn around and tell them that their Britishness is being diluted and that they will simply accept with a bit of grumbling is plain wrong. If they don't have their identity they will feel that they have nothing and nothing to lose.

So who will these loyalists be taking on to restore their pure undiluted Britishness, the 'EU', 'Britain' 'Ireland on it's own', 'Nationalists' or all of the above?

Seems to me that what we will get is expressions of anger in their own areas and little else. Like a majority decision for a UI, what would be the point of a more militant campaign?

Professor Moriarty

FrancieBrady wrote: »

So who will these loyalists be taking on to restore their pure undiluted Britishness, the 'EU', 'Britain' 'Ireland on it's own', 'Nationalists' or all of the above?

Seems to me that what we will get is expressions of anger in their own areas and little else. Like a majority decision for a UI, what would be the point of a more militant campaign?

The danger is that the backstop will be portrayed and a Nationalist/ROI attempt to force a UI and be seen as the reason why their Britishness is being diluted. It wouldn't take much for Loyalism to swallow that.

Sam Russell

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

The DUP are very adept at stoking up Loyalism and taking a small step back when it spills over. It's important to understand that being British and loyalty to the Crown are at the centre of their identity and have been for 300 years.

It was always said of Loyalists that Loyalty to the Crown was second only to Loyalty to the half-Crown.

For those born after decimalisation, and not able to Google, The half-crown was a unit of currency in pre-decimal days.

Blanco100

The DUP position is simple. They see this as an opportunity to distance themselves as far as possible from the south. They couldnt give a fiddlers if their funding is cut (or indeed if their own people starved as a consequence).

The opportunity to stand beside their British overlords in their uncertainty and feel like they belong is far more sentimental to them than jobs, the economy and other trivial issues.

Hearing the DUP talk about "UK wide decisions" is gas, considering NI probably wont be given a pot to p*ss in once the dust settles. And the decision makers dont give a sh*te once it allows their typical voter a bit of bragging rights over their nationalist neighbours.

EdgeCase

What I find amazing is the EU seems to have a far far more in-depth understanding of the nuances of Northern Irish politics than the British government who allegedly run the place!