Brexit discussion thread IV

Leonard Hofstadter

Yvette Cooper is very good at skewering anyone who starts telling her nonsense.

What a shame she's not the leader of the Labour Party over there.

An Ciarraioch

Main take from Varadkar's press conference: 1,000 customs officials required if no deal Brexit, €450m in loans available for business and agri-sector:

https://www.rte.ie/news/brexit/2018/0718/979422-cabinet-to-discuss-preparations-for-hard-brexit/

Dyr

An Ciarraioch wrote: »

Main take from Varadkar's press conference: 1,000 customs officials required if no deal Brexit, €450m in loans available for business and agri-sector:

https://www.rte.ie/news/brexit/2018/0718/979422-cabinet-to-discuss-preparations-for-hard-brexit/

Ah.. money for rich farmers so. FG will always find a way in any crisis to funnel money to their pals

Infini

Bambi wrote: »

Ah.. money for rich farmers so. FG will always find a way in any crisis to funnel money to their pals

To be fair Farming is one of the big sector's going to be affected by this British failure to cop on. If anything we should target to replace any of britains farm export's in the event of a Hard Brexit to offset the damage as well as make the point that everything from here is above board compared to little britain.

prawnsambo

I love Boris's line that "it's not too late to save Brexit".

Leroy42

Enzokk wrote: »

Their lies are also some of the most prominent that can be easily dismissed when pressed. Nigel Farage wondered if it would be so terrible if the UK were like Norway, but failed to expand if he just meant a rich country or one outside of the EU but with a close relationship. If pushed on what he means he would have to clarify if he means he wants EEA or not.

As for Boris Johnson, he would need to explain how the UK will have £350m per week extra if there is a hit to UK GDP as a result of leaving the EU. I am not surprised they were a focal reason for the result, snake oil salesman are usually good at selling a fantasy to people who want to believe. It would be up to the opposition to provide people with the facts if there are none from the other side, not just their own rhetoric.

What gives you the confidence that all this will have changed from the last time? All the stuff you mentioned was known during the last campaign but either people weren't listening or the media was asking the right questions. Do you think that people are listening now or the media will suddenly start skewering the likes of Farage and Boris?

Because neither of those two or happening at the moment.

And who are all these people going to come out in favour of Remain? There are only a handful of Tory MP's, a handful of Labour MP's, and no campaign with the Lib Dems in charge is going to win

trellheim

I love Boris's line that "it's not too late to save Brexit".

This is solely aimed at being the next PM which - on balance - I cannot see any serious contenders - maybe Dominic Grieve

Enzokk

Leroy42 wrote: »

What gives you the confidence that all this will have changed from the last time? All the stuff you mentioned was known during the last campaign but either people weren't listening or the media was asking the right questions. Do you think that people are listening now or the media will suddenly start skewering the likes of Farage and Boris?

Because neither of those two or happening at the moment.

And who are all these people going to come out in favour of Remain? There are only a handful of Tory MP's, a handful of Labour MP's, and no campaign with the Lib Dems in charge is going to win

Well you can never be sure of elections, but the way I see it the leave side hit their peak and had it all in their favour in the referendum. They overspent in the campaign, they were able to coordinate with all the other leave campaigns and they used Cambridge Analytica to target voters. Added to that they gave people such a variety of reasons to vote for Brexit that those on the fence could find a reason to vote for it. I think the main reasons to leave were amplified (secure borders, take control of laws) but a variety of politicians told them the different ways any damage would be negated. This information isn't new or groundbreaking as we have been posting about it many ties before.

So from Leave reaching their peak I believe the remain campaign was sloppily run and they were complacent. They thought that common sense on the economy would prevail and just told people scare stories on what could happen. This worked for them with the Scottish Independence Referendum so they thought they had it worked out. A new campaign would hopefully have more details on what would happen if they leave the EU. They would explain how companies like Airbus and Jaguar Land Rover and Nissan would leave unless they have the same conditions they have now. This is not a threat but reality of the vote. If you add complexity to the way companies operate now you add cost. By adding cost you force them examine why they would stay in the UK. Some would not care about this, I believe many that voted to leave would see sense and change their vote.

trellheim

I believe many that voted to leave would see sense and change their vote.

possibly the hardest convincing is someone who is told you were wrong so vote again ( see Ireland, treaty, Lisbon of ) especially as there is a ton of rancour in it all

Leroy42

J Mysterio wrote: »

The pressure is getting very serious on May now.


Tough day for May (no sympathy): aside from the hammering by Corbyn, Parliament at large and finally Boris, Yvette Cooper finally had her chance to grill May and boy did she. Accompanying video in UK Independent article here.

May either couldnt or wouldnt understand/ answer Cooper's questions on her far fetched customs plan.

My Jebus, that was awful from May. Some sort of formula she kept blatering on about. If she can't even answer, what really is quite a simple question, no wonder they have so little faith in her.

Absolute car crash.

Enzokk

trellheim wrote: »

possibly the hardest convincing is someone who is told you were wrong so vote again ( see Ireland, treaty, Lisbon of ) especially as there is a ton of rancour in it all

Don't frame it that way then. Tell them the vote wasn't fair as one side overspent and there was interference from outside which means it has to be re-run. You aren't telling people they were wrong, you are asking them to examine the choices again...or something silly like that.

prawnsambo

Enzokk wrote: »

Don't frame it that way then. Tell them the vote wasn't fair as one side overspent and there was interference from outside which means it has to be re-run. You aren't telling people they were wrong, you are asking them to examine the choices again...or something silly like that.

No, you never revisit the vote. People are still quoting the Lisbon Treaty, even though that was renogotiated to amend the issues that had become hot here and elsewhere.

You take a final vote on the exit deal. With the option to reject it all and revoke the A50. It's a new vote on new issues.

But it won't happen. The lemmings are heading for the cliff edge and no lemming ever stopped and said "are you sure we're going the right way?"

Enzokk

prawnsambo wrote: »

No, you never revisit the vote. People are still quoting the Lisbon Treaty, even though that was renogotiated to amend the issues that had become hot here and elsewhere.

You take a final vote on the exit deal. With the option to reject it all and revoke the A50. It's a new vote on new issues.

But it won't happen. The lemmings are heading for the cliff edge and no lemming ever stopped and said "are you sure we're going the right way?"

Nothing to disagree with there. There seems to be no appetite to have a second vote with those in power right now in any case. Theresa May is too busy fighting from week to week to worry about such things and while I am sure Jeremy Corbyn is aware of the damage Brexit will do he is all too happy that its the Tories that are forcing this on the country and at the end of it he will get to implement his socialist utopia on the UK without EU interfering when he wants to subsidize the railways and energy companies that he nationalizes.

The SNP is in a similar position in that a hard Brexit will make Scottish independence more likely and they know they have no way of changing anything with their votes in any case.

An Ciarraioch

Of course, one would expect an Open Skies agreement to be finalised by March, but that remains a potential consequence of no deal:

https://twitter.com/gavreilly/status/1019636060001918980

flatty

May's natural habitat hard brexit little englander clique. There will be no rerun with her or anyone from the brexit wing in charge. And they won't relinquish the reins til it's too late. There will be no rerun.
Hard brexit is the only course now I'd imagine.

Capt'n Midnight

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

Did they vote for the 350m that won't be going into the NHS?

Enzokk wrote: »

As for Boris Johnson, he would need to explain how the UK will have £350m per week extra if there is a hit to UK GDP as a result of leaving the EU.

When you compare the UK economy to how everyone else is getting on, the actual cost of the vote for Brexit is £440m a week in lost tax revenue.

And this is before the effects of reduced investment kick in.

And there is still the possibility of undoing Article 50.

badtoro

Capt'n Midnight wrote: »

£440m a week in lost tax revenue.

Anyone else seeing Chief Brody saying we're gonna need a bigger bus while reading that.

Capt'n Midnight

kunst nugget wrote: »

I wonder will we still hear that wonderful 'Germany needs us more than we need them because of car sales' argument...

Yeah, the theory that the EU will cave in because it needs UK money more than it's principles.



Oh Look , principles.

http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_IP-18-4581_en.htm

Antitrust: Commission fines Google €4.34 billion for illegal practices regarding Android mobile devices to strengthen dominance of Google's search engine

trellheim

Antitrust: Commission fines Google €4.34 billion for illegal practices

off topic but that will soften a few coughs

swampgas

<puts philosophical hat on>

It's looking like a hard Brexit.

It struck me that while this might not be quite the same as the Berlin wall coming down or the collapse of the Soviet Union, a hard Brexit would be an extremely significant event. It could be the end of the United Kingdom as we know it. Ireland and Scotland could be reshaped, and the political map of Europe altered significantly.

So while mostly I'm concerned about the impact on people's lives, the impact on the economy and jobs, the situation in NI, et cetera et cetera, I also aware that I've got a ringside seat to what might be one of the defining events of the decade, if not the century.

If that's the only consolation I can take from this, it will have to do.

<takes philosophical hat off>

Taytoland

An Ciarraioch wrote: »

Of course, one would expect an Open Skies agreement to be finalised by March, but that remains a potential consequence of no deal:

https://twitter.com/gavreilly/status/1019636060001918980

You got to admire his sense of humour.

Water John

You'll find yourself living in interesting times.
Yes, I can see and agree with the attractions. However, I'm sad for those who'll loose out and those who through harder circumstances will have a tougher and possibly shorter life.

Trasna1

prawnsambo wrote: »

No, you never revisit the vote. People are still quoting the Lisbon Treaty, even though that was renogotiated to amend the issues that had become hot here and elsewhere.

You take a final vote on the exit deal. With the option to reject it all and revoke the A50. It's a new vote on new issues.

But it won't happen. The lemmings are heading for the cliff edge and no lemming ever stopped and said "are you sure we're going the right way?"

The treaty wasn't renegotiated, there were a few meaningless protocols tacked on about Irish neutrality (and abortion iirc) to help resell the document to Ireland.

The meat of what we voted on was the same the second time around.

brickster69

An Ciarraioch wrote: »

Of course, one would expect an Open Skies agreement to be finalised by March, but that remains a potential consequence of no deal:

https://twitter.com/gavreilly/status/1019636060001918980

Tell that to the Spanish, Greek and Portuguese tourist industry Leo. Does he understand who  runs the airspace to the West of Ireland also ?

prawnsambo

Trasna1 wrote: »

The treaty wasn't renegotiated, there were a few meaningless protocols tacked on about Irish neutrality (and abortion iirc) to help resell the document to Ireland.

The meat of what we voted on was the same the second time around.

The neutrality issue wasn't meaningless. It was one of the main reasons it didn't pass. But we're getting way off topic.

swampgas

There was coverage of the air traffic control issue last year ... for example http://www.thejournal.ie/air-traffic-control-brexit-3-3552387-Aug2017/

I imagine there would be a lot of pressure from all sides to make sure that flights were not disrupted whatever form of Brexit we end with though, although with the lunatics running the asylum in the UK right now I wouldn't be surprised if it doesn't become a bargaining chip at some point.

mickoneill31

brickster69 wrote: »

Tell that to the Spanish, Greek and Portuguese tourist industry Leo. Does he understand who  runs the airspace to the West of Ireland also ?

Is it the UK? Why? How hard would it be to transfer to Ireland or an alternative?

EdgeCase

Could Ireland not simply join FABEC and connect onto the French bloc? We're not THAT far northwest.

https://www.fabec.eu

Or, would we simply be able to be our own FAB and just go back to pre-Eurocontrol working?

An Ciarraioch

https://twitter.com/hendopolis/status/1019676727231107076

kowtow

An Ciarraioch wrote: »

Of course, one would expect an Open Skies agreement to be finalised by March, but that remains a potential consequence of no deal:

https://twitter.com/gavreilly/status/1019636060001918980

I'm not sure that Leo threatening to block flights for fishing rights is particularly constructive from the perspective of Irish carriers.

Quite a high percentage of routes from Irish airports seem to go over the UK!

Surely this threat would make more sense, and be better voiced by Macron, in the interest of not inflaming things just for the fun of it.

judeboy101

kowtow wrote: »

I'm not sure that Leo threatening to block flights for fishing rights is particularly constructive from the perspective of Irish carriers.

Quite a high percentage of routes from Irish airports seem to go over the UK!

Surely this threat would make more sense, and be better voiced by Macron, in the interest of not inflaming things just for the fun of it.

Can't the UK just fly over NI and across the pond?

LeinsterDub

kowtow wrote: »

I'm not sure that Leo threatening to block flights for fishing rights is particularly constructive from the perspective of Irish carriers.

Quite a high percentage of routes from Irish airports seem to go over the UK!

Surely this threat would make more sense, and be better voiced by Macron, in the interest of not inflaming things just for the fun of it.

I don't think that was a threat more so you can't have your cake and eat with a hard brexit either. He basically said you can't hard brexit where you like (fish) but remain in Europe where you like too (open skies)

kowtow

LeinsterDub wrote: »

I don't think that was a threat more so you can't have your cake and eat with a hard brexit either. He basically said you can't hard brexit where you like (fish) but remain in Europe where you like too (open skies)

There is a huge difference between fishing rights and open skies, and Leo ought to know that. That's a very poor example of having your cake and eating it, and even if it wasn't there is simply no leader worse positioned in Europe to deliver that threat to the UK.

It's hard to imagine that he isn't being a little over-enthusiastic here.

On the other hand, JRM & Co will want to shake his hand, because he's just done more in 5 minutes to steel UK voters sinews behind a hard Brexit than Theresa May and Boris Johnson between them have managed in two years.

LeinsterDub

kowtow wrote: »

There is a huge difference between fishing rights and open skies, and Leo ought to know that. That's a very poor example of having your cake and eating it, and even if it wasn't there is simply no leader worse positioned in Europe to deliver that threat to the UK.

Do educate me what's the difference? I thought they were both European agreements?

Trasna1

kowtow wrote: »

There is a huge difference between fishing rights and open skies, and Leo ought to know that. That's a very poor example of having your cake and eating it, and even if it wasn't there is simply no leader worse positioned in Europe to deliver that threat to the UK.

It's hard to imagine that he isn't being a little over-enthusiastic here.

On the other hand, JRM & Co will want to shake his hand, because he's just done more in 5 minutes to steel UK voters sinews behind a hard Brexit than Theresa May and Boris Johnson between them have managed in two years.

To be perfectly honest, whatever Leo says is not going to make a blind bit of difference to public perceptions in the UK, with the sides so entrenched. His comments are to play to an Irish gallery - he was essentially attempting a show of strength.

The only way the UK can back out of its bind is if it comes to the realisation by itself that this project is not worth proceeding with.

Water John

So if Leo says anything mildly negative, he's to blame for the UK's convulsions on Brexit. Methinks your name says it all, Kowtow.
BTW I think you milk cows. Maybe you supply Dairygold or Carbery, both deeply dependent on the UK cheddar market. What is the WTO tariff on cheddar, 48%?

kowtow

LeinsterDub wrote: »

Do educate me what's the difference? I thought they were both European agreements?

For one thing open skies pre-date the EU, but more to the point fishing rights are an exhaustible economic good explicitly carved up between EU nations (in return for other concessions and restrictions, like sugar beet IIRC) and therefore an inherent part of the EU's internal trade arrangements.

The freedoms of the air - the right to transit in particular - are very widely shared by the vast majority of the world's nations completely independently of other trade and economic arrangements between them.

To suggest that if you take away our fishing rights, your aircraft won't be able to transit is outrageously aggressive, but more to the point - if this is indeed the message from the EU - he is the wrong man to deliver it, not least because such a stand off would - double, triple? - the flight time of the majority of Irish flights not to mention leave big question marks over the massive Shanwick ATC zone to the West of Ireland which is controlled by the UK.

If the sort of threat he intimates were to be followed through, Britain would be damaged massively, but Ireland would be ruined economically in short order. It would be like Berlin during the airlift.

Rain Ascending

LeinsterDub wrote: »

I don't think that was a threat more so you can't have your cake and eat with a hard brexit either. He basically said you can't hard brexit where you like (fish) but remain in Europe where you like too (open skies)

Yeah ... the quote as given by Gavin Reilly is poorly phrased. Assuming it's accurate, Varadkar would have been better advised to avoid confusing analogies and stick with more factual detail.

Transit rights are not in question when it comes to the various types of Brexit. They are covered by the International Air Services Transit Agreement. Both Ireland and the UK are signatories. So even with a no-deal Brexit, UK flights will be able to cross Irish airspace and visa versa.

As discussed above, there is the question of the joint UK-Ireland FAB. My guess here is that both sides may need to unwind that unified block and revert back to the prior two-block set-up. Possibly very challenging (I've no insights there), but it appears to be a technical issue, rather than legal and both sides would have an incentive to work it out quickly.

The real problems comes with commercial landing rights, licensing, and certification. This is what could shut down UK airports and commercial services in and out of the UK. As ever, the EUReferendum blog provides a good starting point to get a view of the issues.

I'd have much preferred if Varadkar had pointed explicitly to some of these issues, e.g. Open Skies, rather than making a more confusing analogy. Unlike most Irish commentators, he is followed by the UK media and therefore he has some (albeit limited) ability to influence the debate there. They badly need to embrace at least some technical detail and he has the language skills to get it picked up.

kowtow

Water John wrote: »

So if Leo says anything mildly negative, he's to blame for the UK's convulsions on Brexit. Methinks your name says it all, Kowtow.
BTW I think you milk cows. Maybe you supply Dairygold or Carbery, both deeply dependent on the UK cheddar market. What is the WTO tariff on cheddar, 48%?

Yup, Cheddar is outrageous, particularly cheap factory blocks.

Leo is not saying something mildly negative, he's intimating a threat which is extremely outlandish, and he doesn't need to because we are in a fairly strong position here and we have more to lose by overplaying our hand than by simply getting on with things professionally and retaining the high ground.

LeinsterDub

kowtow wrote: »

For one thing open skies pre-date the EU.

https://www.ft.com/content/612977f0-21bb-11e8-9a70-08f715791301

This link suggests open skies is linked to eu membership

FrancieBrady

On the subject of airlines: surely Heathrow as a hub would be massively impacted in a hard Brexit?

Charles Babbage

Bit cynical wrote: »

And remember that the border is mainly an issue on the island of Ireland. Once the hard border is in place, in a very short space of time it will stop being a news item for most of the UK.

No coverage of the border poll then?

Imreoir2

kowtow wrote: »

I'm not sure that Leo threatening to block flights for fishing rights is particularly constructive from the perspective of Irish carriers.

Quite a high percentage of routes from Irish airports seem to go over the UK!

Surely this threat would make more sense, and be better voiced by Macron, in the interest of not inflaming things just for the fun of it.

Leo is not making a threat, he can't make this happen or not happen. He is simply pointing at the fire the brits are playing with.

Capt'n Midnight

Water John wrote: »

BTW I think you milk cows. Maybe you supply Dairygold or Carbery, both deeply dependent on the UK cheddar market. What is the WTO tariff on cheddar, 48%?

It's not just the tariff, it's how long it takes to reduce to zero even if you get a trade deal.

If this the best the EU can do, imagine how tough it will be for the UK. But it means we better access.
As it stands, Japan will lower the tariff on soft cheeses over a 15-year period and establish a quota.

...
Meanwhile, 248,054 tons of natural cheese was imported into Japan,

Capt'n Midnight

EdgeCase wrote: »

Could Ireland not simply join FABEC and connect onto the French bloc? We're not THAT far northwest.

https://www.fabec.eu

2015 saw more than 1 million flights managed by Irish air traffic controllers and radio officers in Irish airspace.

Shannon manages a large chunk of trans-Atlantic traffic.

Imreoir2

kowtow wrote: »

If the sort of threat he intimates were to be followed through, Britain would be damaged massively, but Ireland would be ruined economically in short order. It would be like Berlin during the airlift.

You do realise that we are not surrounded by the UK right? A large number of our flights go through, or over the UK at presant, but a no-deal Brexit means UK flights are largely grounded, whereas ours merely need to be rerouted.

EdgeCase

The aviation situation will simply *have* to be resolved. Otherwise, you're looking at vast damage to the UK economy. It's not really something they can spend time fussing about over.

Trasna1

Capt'n Midnight wrote: »

It's not just the tariff, it's how long it takes to reduce to zero even if you get a trade deal.

If this the best the EU can do, imagine how tough it will be for the UK. But it means we better access.
As it stands, Japan will lower the tariff on soft cheeses over a 15-year period and establish a quota.

...
Meanwhile, 248,054 tons of natural cheese was imported into Japan,

The EU-Japanese trade deal has a long run in to allow the domestic protected industries in both markets to adjust, protected agriculture in Japan and protected car manufacturing in the EU

Rain Ascending

Imreoir2 wrote: »

You do realise that we are not surrounded by the UK right? A large number of our flights go through, or over the UK at presant, but a no-deal Brexit means UK flights are largely grounded, whereas ours merely need to be rerouted.

I'm not sure that EU flights will be forced to reroute. As already discussed already, they'll have the right to transit UK airspace. Recognition of the safety of UK air traffic control might be an issue, but given the potential disruption in Irish flights having to reroute when flying to the rest of Europe and in continental flights heading to North America, it wouldn't surprise me if the EU unilaterally decided to recognize UK air traffic control. No agreement is needed with the UK to do so!

The European Commission will be taking a number of these unilateral actions to make life easier for EU industries and stakeholders. In some cases, they'll also have beneficial side effects for UK players, but the real objective is to avoid major disruption for EU players.

It really would be a lot better if we stopped pretending to know the ins and outs of international airspace agreements.