Brexit discussion thread IV

Imreoir2

Just in case it was missed here, the EU Parliment's Brexit Steering Group issued a statement on the UK White Paper a few days ago.

The BSG reiterated that negotiating a new relationship with the UK post-Brexit is conditional on an orderly withdrawal of the UK from the EU on the basis of a Withdrawal Agreement (WA). It reconfirmed the Parliament’s position expressed in its resolutions that it will not consent to a WA, including a transition period, without a credible “back stop” provision for the Northern Ireland/Ireland border to prevent a hard border and safeguard the integrity of the single market, faithfully reflecting the commitments entered into in the Joint Report of 8 December 2017.

http://www.europarl.europa.eu/news/en/press-room/20180712IPR07806/statement-by-the-brexit-steering-group-on-uk-government-white-paper

flatty

Imreoir2 wrote: »

lawred2 wrote: »

would it?

Would represent more of a coming to senses moment I would have thought.

Not in the UK, a significant number of people don't just want Brexit, they want a no-deal Brexit. Delivering a hard Brexit will be a disaster for the UK, but not delivering a hard Brexit would be a disaster for the political careers of lots of MPs.

It seems that the only hope of a soft Brexit is to prove that "project fear" is infact just plain reality. It might be necessary to allow the UK to crash out and then restart the talks once their ports have collapsed.

Can talks even be restarted once they are out? To what end?

An Ciarraioch

This is all going swimmingly ...

https://twitter.com/faisalislam/status/1018870493301092357

Imreoir2

flatty wrote: »

Can talks even be restarted once they are out? To what end?

Of course they can. There is no reason the UK could not agree a soft Brexit type relationship with the EU after they crash out with no deal in March. They could apply to join the Customs Union and Single Market in 2020 after spending a sobering year in the wilderness, for example.

Leroy42

Well techincally it would be new talks, talks to join the EU rather than Brexit talks.

Come 29 March 2019, they are gone, unless a deal is made. The UK think they have the EU on the time side of things, but of course the UK is fast approaching a complete crash out, with no transition and this seems to have escaped them. They all seem to be under the impression that the transition is already agreed and taken for granted.

But once they are gone, then they need to start talks to join. Of course the sooner after the date the easier the talks will be as little will have changed.

Enzokk

What a mess the UK finds itself in. I fail to see what Theresa May is intending here, other than to last another day. It cannot be to get an orderly exit as she has not been doing anything close to that.

The talk of a second referendum from prominent MP's is a very good thing. You were never going to have the PM announce a second referendum out of the blue, but it would have to gather momentum for it to happen. Seeing this as the start of the momentum and it will surely only keep building until a second referendum is inevitable. Maybe this is the plan of no.10 all along, to have such a chaotic Brexit that a second referendum is forced to overturn the result. Although betting the house didn't work out for the last person to hold the position and the stakes are raised now, it would seem to be very risky to play that game now.

Silent Running

Leroy42 wrote: »

Well techincally it would be new talks, talks to join the EU rather than Brexit talks.

Come 29 March 2019, they are gone, unless a deal is made. The UK think they have the EU on the time side of things, but of course the UK is fast approaching a complete crash out, with no transition and this seems to have escaped them. They all seem to be under the impression that the transition is already agreed and taken for granted.

But once they are gone, then they need to start talks to join. Of course the sooner after the date the easier the talks will be as little will have changed.

Would that not mean applying as a new member, which would be the end of their rebate and opt outs, including the Euro?

AlmightyCushion

Silent Running wrote: »

Would that not mean applying as a new member, which would be the end of their rebate and opt outs, including the Euro?

I assume that would be the case.

Imreoir2

Leroy42 wrote: »

Well techincally it would be new talks, talks to join the EU rather than Brexit talks.

Come 29 March 2019, they are gone, unless a deal is made. The UK think they have the EU on the time side of things, but of course the UK is fast approaching a complete crash out, with no transition and this seems to have escaped them. They all seem to be under the impression that the transition is already agreed and taken for granted.

But once they are gone, then they need to start talks to join. Of course the sooner after the date the easier the talks will be as little will have changed.

They would not have to apply to rejoin the EU, they could enter talks to have a Norway type deal.

Silent Running

Enzokk wrote: »

What a mess the UK finds itself in. I fail to see what Theresa May is intending here, other than to last another day. It cannot be to get an orderly exit as she has not been doing anything close to that.

The talk of a second referendum from prominent MP's is a very good thing. You were never going to have the PM announce a second referendum out of the blue, but it would have to gather momentum for it to happen. Seeing this as the start of the momentum and it will surely only keep building until a second referendum is inevitable. Maybe this is the plan of no.10 all along, to have such a chaotic Brexit that a second referendum is forced to overturn the result. Although betting the house didn't work out for the last person to hold the position and the stakes are raised now, it would seem to be very risky to play that game now.

Well May got up on her hind legs today and stated that there would be "no second referendum, under any circumstances".

Water John

Remainers now forcing the CU vote is what needs to bring all this to a head.
LB and SNP should support that vote.

Leroy42

Enzokk wrote: »

What a mess the UK finds itself in. I fail to see what Theresa May is intending here, other than to last another day. It cannot be to get an orderly exit as she has not been doing anything close to that.

The talk of a second referendum from prominent MP's is a very good thing. You were never going to have the PM announce a second referendum out of the blue, but it would have to gather momentum for it to happen. Seeing this as the start of the momentum and it will surely only keep building until a second referendum is inevitable. Maybe this is the plan of no.10 all along, to have such a chaotic Brexit that a second referendum is forced to overturn the result. Although betting the house didn't work out for the last person to hold the position and the stakes are raised now, it would seem to be very risky to play that game now.

I was prepared to give May the benefit of the doubt after Chequers. Maybe, just maybe, she had finally realised that the route she was taken was wrong and that she needed to take a strong hand to save the UK from itself.

Maybe this was always the long term plan. SHe had seen that the likes of Boris and Davies were set in their position and she needed to let reality sink in over time to get to a position that they had few options left.

That was all fine and dandy until she completely folded today. She has no plan, no principle, no overarching aim. She wants to be PM, even if that means in name only and even if that means regularly embarrassing herself on the world stage. She is making decisions based on a day by day plan, nothing more.

Imreoir2

Enzokk wrote: »

What a mess the UK finds itself in. I fail to see what Theresa May is intending here, other than to last another day. It cannot be to get an orderly exit as she has not been doing anything close to that.

The talk of a second referendum from prominent MP's is a very good thing. You were never going to have the PM announce a second referendum out of the blue, but it would have to gather momentum for it to happen. Seeing this as the start of the momentum and it will surely only keep building until a second referendum is inevitable. Maybe this is the plan of no.10 all along, to have such a chaotic Brexit that a second referendum is forced to overturn the result. Although betting the house didn't work out for the last person to hold the position and the stakes are raised now, it would seem to be very risky to play that game now.

Suggesting that the UK government has had a plan all along is giving them way too much credit. All available evidence points to them being a bunch of incompetants being bounced from one crisis to another all the while doing whatever is expediant to hold onto power for a little while longer.

Leroy42

Imreoir2 wrote: »

They would not have to apply to rejoin the EU, they could enter talks to have a Norway type deal.

Yes, but in a new set of talks. They can apply for whatever they want, but as of 30 March they are doing so as an outsider, not from inside.

Zubeneschamali

Imreoir2 wrote: »

They would not have to apply to rejoin the EU, they could enter talks to have a Norway type deal.

Which would include free movement? I don't think that would fly if Brexit has already happened.

I think the best we could hope for is a Canada type Free Trade arrangement.

Infini

Water John wrote: »

Remainers now forcing the CU vote is what needs to bring all this to a head.
LB and SNP should support that vote.

Wonder if that was her intent by agreeing to these ammendments. Force the issue front and center. Makes no sense to simply agree to these terms which are wholly contradictory and will ultimately result in a crash out as no stop back means no deal.

Regardless it looks like the wheels are flying off the Brexit bus entirely at this point.

Enzokk

Imreoir2 wrote: »

Suggesting that the UK government has had a plan all along is giving them way too much credit. All available evidence points to them being a bunch of incompetants being bounced from one crisis to another all the while doing whatever is expediant to hold onto power for a little while longer.

I am sure that is the way it could be spun for public consumption. I agree that it is more likely the coming together of a bunch of incompetent politicians than a thought out plan. I do agree and I don't think there is such a plan, it's more hope than anything else seeing that the best for us is no Brexit at all.

On the EU position if the UK wanted to withdraw their triggering article 50, I don't think the EU would need to punish them for that. Take away some rebates they had but let them keep the GBP. It's no use trying to punish them for actually making a decision that the EU wants to happen and that we want to happen.

Imreoir2

Leroy42 wrote: »

Yes, but in a new set of talks. They can apply for whatever they want, but as of 30 March they are doing so as an outsider, not from inside.

Thats the idea, yes.

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

Which would include free movement? I don't think that would fly if Brexit has already happened.

I think the best we could hope for is a Canada type Free Trade arrangement.

Who knows? Food shortages tend to focus the mind, they might see alignment with the EU in a new light when they have had to deal with the hardships of living without it.

trellheim

That Cross-Border Trade Bill is scheduled for all stages by 10pm tonight

If anyone wants to watch live https://www.parliamentlive.tv/Event/Index/3f0453f3-e04d-403b-b749-9f0bf005cceb its NI right now tune in for the pain


PS : tune in its right in the middle of it !

An Ciarraioch

Tony Connelly reiterates that the ERG amendments effectively mean no deal, by making the backstop illegal:

https://twitter.com/tconnellyRTE/status/1018868913369690112

Leroy42

Infini wrote: »

Wonder if that was her intent by agreeing to these ammendments. Force the issue front and center. Makes no sense to simply agree to these terms which are wholly contradictory and will ultimately result in a crash out as no stop back means no deal.

Regardless it looks like the wheels are flying off the Brexit bus entirely at this point.

So you think her intent is for her to give in completely to a group then lose the vote in the commons because of another group?

So looking weak before losing a vote?

Its...different anyway

ArmaniJeanss

Silent Running wrote: »

Well May got up on her hind legs today and stated that there would be "no second referendum, under any circumstances".

That's pretty irrelevant I think.
There's always the old reliable 'having a different referendum that isn't actually a re-run of the first at all at all so it can't be called a second referendum, no siree' get-out.

Imreoir2

trellheim wrote: »

That Cross-Border Trade Bill is scheduled for all stages by 10pm tonight

If anyone wants to watch live https://www.parliamentlive.tv/Event/Index/3f0453f3-e04d-403b-b749-9f0bf005cceb its NI right now tune in for the pain


PS : tune in its right in the middle of it !

Moderate Conservatives are quite pissed off, Anna Soubry MP (Conservative) speaking just now discribed the amendments as "the stuff of madness".

trellheim

Yes I reckon we have some level of excitement yet to come today

Imreoir2

Imreoir2 wrote: »

Moderate Conservatives are quite pissed off, Anna Soubry MP (Conservative) speaking just now discribed the amendments as "the stuff of madness".

She was very good.

lawred2

Silent Running wrote: »

Well May got up on her hind legs today and stated that there would be "no second referendum, under any circumstances".

May has made a lot of empty statements

Infini

An Ciarraioch wrote: »

Tony Connelly reiterates that the ERG amendments effectively mean no deal, by making the backstop illegal:

https://twitter.com/tconnellyRTE/status/1018868913369690112

If this is allowed to pass the EU will essentially turn around and basically say unless this changes there will be no deal. Economy will take a serious dump shoetly afterwards.

Water John

There are a number of Con MPs who cannot, in conscience vote for this.

PeadarCo

Infini wrote:

If this is allowed to pass the EU will essentially turn around and basically say unless this changes there will be no deal. Economy will take a serious dump shoetly afterwards.

The problem is you have a lot of people like Boris Johnson who don't care if the economy takes a hit and you have a lot of people who don't believe the economy will be hit. The biggest issue is the amount of routine stuff the EU does around international commerce that most people don't even realise. Most people don't realise the knock on impact of a hard Brexit.

Spanish Eyes

Seriously is their hubris gone completely mad on steroids, or do they really have the hard neck to present an amended WP to EU with these amendments that will make the backstop illegal?

The EU will not be in a position to negotiate without the backstop, but then of course the spin will be that the EU are bullies and refused to negotiate or something like that.

It is actually very interesting to follow the absolute calamity of all this, but it's also very dangerous for us if it all falls through.

What a totally unnecessary mess.

lawred2

Why are we talking about Ireland?

trellheim

David Davis on now

Rhineshark

Good gods, she folded like an origami swan.

So...now what? Is there any position they've not ruled out now?

Everyone should be watching it. Interesting day to be sure.

Infini

Spanish Eyes wrote: »

Seriously is their hubris gone completely mad on steroids, or do they really have the hard neck to present an amended WP to EU with these amendments that will make the backstop illegal?

The EU will not be in a position to negotiate without the backstop, but then of course the spin will be that the EU are bullies and refused to negotiate or something like that.

It is actually very interesting to follow the absolute calamity of all this, but it's also very dangerous for us if it all falls through.

What a totally unnecessary mess.

True it's a total shytefest buy if there's one thing about it is that if a Hard Brexit is certain then at least we have some time to prepare. On top of that the corrosive effect it will have on the UK in the interim might focus some minds over there expecially if the pound were to drop below €1.

Roger_007

It's difficult to see how May can continue as PM for much longer. Her authority is completely gone. Her demeanour suggest to me that she wants out; she just needs some pretext to go with some shred of dignity.
The problem is what then? The hard Brexiteers don't have the numbers to get their man/woman in as PM and what would be the point of replacing May with someone similar.
I think a UK general election looms in the not-too-distant future.

Enzokk

Business leaders have had their say in a letter to the PM on her customs arrangement being debated right now I believe, unsurprisingly it is not favourable and thus was not published by Government.

Exclusive: Theresa May was warned by business leaders that her Brexit customs bill is 'not fit for purpose'

Theresa May's plans for post-Brexit customs arrangements are "not fit for purpose," according to a damaging and previously unseen letter addressed to government officials by industry leaders.

If these two wrecking amendments go to a vote, I am almost at the point of believing the government allowed them in order to force the vote and show JRM etc. to be a small faction.

Enzokk

Priti Patel on now, still thinking the UK is equal to the EU. She has also repeated a few lies about the UK being able to make their own laws after they leave the EU. You can basically stop listening to her once she starts off with, lets be kind, a misunderstanding of UK laws.

trellheim

Discussing one of the NI amendments now.

Laurence Robertson on now ( he is anti-GFA) so the rhetoric is as expected

If that amendment passes its toast

An Ciarraioch

And, once again, we must turn to Ian Dunt:

http://politics.co.uk/blogs/2018/07/16/govt-capitulation-today-could-all-but-guarantee-no-deal

Enzokk

trellheim wrote: »

Discussing one of the NI amendments now.

Basically they are only protecting the UK with this amendment. Also, there is no need to delay the talks due to the border, because trade happens across the border and people cross the border without issue at all at the moment so there is nothing to worry about. He repeats the talking point that the border only needs to be discussed after the trade talks, because that will form the basis of what border there may be.

That was Laurence Robertson making the points.

lawred2

Enzokk wrote: »

Basically they are only protecting the UK with this amendment. Also, there is no need to delay the talks due to the border, because trade happens across the border and people cross the border without issue at all at the moment so there is nothing to worry about. He repeats the talking point that the border only needs to be discussed after the trade talks, because that will form the basis of what border there may be.

That was Laurence Robertson making the points.

Basically revising previous commitments and promises regarding NI.

A very British thing to do.

Inquitus

This, as Howard said, is complete insanity, enshrining in law a no deal Brexit on account of JRM and his band of misfits!

Enzokk

Inquitus wrote: »

This, as Howard said, is complete insanity, enshrining in law a no deal Brexit on account of JRM and his band of misfits!

I don't know what they are thinking. They will enshrine in law that the backstop will not be applicable. The EU has said no negotiations without the backstop in law. So they look to be torpedoing the negotiations with the EU, which isn't a surprise as the ERG is all about hard Brexit. Its the fact that the government has seemingly allowed it that is astonishing.

A point made, David Davis resigned due to the white paper, but if he had waited a few days he could have saved his job if they adopt these amendments. Then again he seems lazy, so maybe it suits him to not spend 4 hours of his time in the past few month doing his job. He could now just sit on the backbenches instead of meeting the EU.

Craig Mackinlay is on now, he seems to think that there is no need to talk about the customs union, it is clear it will not be adopted and they will not be in the customs union in whatever name. He went on a tirade against the tampon tax and how the UK government tried to get rid of it but the customs union actually prevented it. He was corrected that in March 2016 it was possible to get rid of it and is not restricted by the EU. Unsurprisingly he wasn't aware of it at all.

Infini

Inquitus wrote: »

This, as Howard said, is complete insanity, enshrining in law a no deal Brexit on account of JRM and his band of misfits!

Which if this is the case how long would it take before thing's royally go south in this case. Allowing these ammendment's is blatant stupidity of the highest order and if the UK passes an amendment that essentially break's a key point of a previous agreement, will the EU even bother at this point pursuing things further?

As it stand's the EU has basically lined up behind Ireland, they know that were at the front line of this mess which is NOT of our own making and are the one's most vunerable right now to the damage they can cause. As thing's go could the EU play hardball and basically fire a warning shot at the UK by suspending talk's based on this amendment until the situation changes? They don't have to outright refuse to negotiate before March but from what I can see the only way to make the fools running this charade see any remote sense is to give them a serious shock at what they're seemingly walking into. My honest opinion is that the absolute certain threat of a Hard Brexit not the possibility is the only way we'll start seeing the serious self inflicted damage this WILL cause. I honestly believe if the £ drops below the € then that's the only thing that will scare some sense into them and make people wake up to some degree at what leaving the EU truly entails.

Anthracite

Listening to Sammy Wilson prattling away with nonsense, backed up by Kate Hoey, it really is a disgrace that Sinn Fein can't be arsed to represent the other 50% or so of people in NI in these debates. This debate is completely one-sided.

That man talking about "The Dale" is pissing me off.

Anthracite

Deleted User wrote: »

That man talking about "The Dale" is pissing me off.

Yup. He seems to think tariffs are the problem. Either doesn't know or pretends not to that regulation is the problem. Waves away the customs issue with vague references to 'technology'.

Enzokk

Anthracite wrote: »

Listening to Sammy Wilson prattling away with nonsense, backed up by Kate Hoey, it really is a disgrace that Sinn Fein can't be arsed to represent the other 50% or so of people in NI in these debates. This debate is completely one-sided.

It is one-sided because I guess the side that wants to convince you will be speaking a lot. They also don't have to give way to another speaker if they don't want to, so if they know someone will not agree with their view they will just ignore it and prattle on even if it is spreading misinformation.

Deleted User wrote: »

That man talking about "The Dale" is pissing me off.

I couldn't make out, did he just say the only reason there is a frontier on the island is because of the GFA? I am sure he said that this is the reason why there is the debate now and it seems that if there was no GFA, there would be no border to sort out?