Brexit discussion thread IV

BonnieSituation

[Deleted User] wrote: »

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

Beat me to it. One thing I really enjoy about this thread is the informed opinions and the willingness to be informed. Let's not start down the road of AH.

BonnieSituation

BonnieSituation wrote: »

Beat me to it. One thing I really enjoy about this thread is the informed opinions and the willingness to be informed. Let's not start down the road of AH.

Exactly. It's one of the only threads where it's fine to stand up and say "I don't get this. Can someone try explain it to me? Thanks."

Infini

EdgeCase wrote: »

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.

The problem though is that the way the Brits are acting atm expecially that little troll mogg and that bufoon boris, they dont care how much damage is caused or how catastrophic the effects are. Makes me wonder if they're doing this for ulterior motives like short selling or profiteering since no politician who was serious about their jobs would let a clusterfeck of a situation intentionally come about that would leave an entire country worse off.

These fools will end up crashing their country out and the amount of treaties and such required would take a significant amount of time to correct. I honestly believe by September well know for for certain that a crash out brexit is all but certain and only the chance of a referendum on wether to actually drive the country off a cliff has a chance of undoing this mess. I don't think the EU can afford to wait until the last minute if the Brits are dead set on blowing themselves up they'll have to have serious plans ready to go months beforehand.

Zubeneschamali

EdgeCase wrote: »

The aviation situation will simply *have* to be resolved. Otherwise, you're looking at vast damage to the UK economy.

How long did they survive the volcanic ash cloud? 4 or 5 days?

So Hard Brexit could last as long as a week.

J Mysterio

TM going on two day visit to NI. Meeting business leaders apparently, should be a lovely trip for her.

Professor Moriarty

J Mysterio wrote: »

TM going on two day visit to NI. Meeting business leaders apparently, should be a lovely trip for her.

She'll spend much of her time with her fingers in her ears while singing "La, la, la, I can't hear you."

devnull

Now being reported that the breach of the pairing agreement was not in fact a 'mistake' but may have been a deliberate ploy by the Tory Whips to make sure that they won all of the votes.

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/chief-whip-julian-smith-told-mps-to-defy-pairing-deals-r5rv59fm3

If that is indeed the case then it is extremely serious since it suggests that on top of all the scandal with vote leave and the Russian interference influencing the referendum, there is now also a lot of unethical things going on in relation to votes in the house.

I think the leavers must be close to being morally bankrupt at this stage.

trellheim

Beat me to it. One thing I really enjoy about this thread is the informed opinions and the willingness to be informed.

Ref Aviation there is a lot of knowledge in thread. 1st,2nd,3rd,4th freedoms and cabotage - all worth reading up on to get an idea of what the UK will need to do. For detailed knowledge worth reading the pprune thread ref licensing https://www.pprune.org/rumours-news/607757-ec-notice-brexit-issued-licenses-certificates-invalid.html

Professor Moriarty

devnull wrote: »

Now being reported that the breach of the pairing agreement was not in fact a 'mistake' but may have been a deliberate ploy by the Tory Whips to make sure that they won all of the votes.

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/chief-whip-julian-smith-told-mps-to-defy-pairing-deals-r5rv59fm3

If that is indeed the case then it is extremely serious since it suggests that on top of all the scandal with vote leave and the Russian interference influencing the referendum, there is now also a lot of unethical things going on in relation to votes in the house.

I think the leavers must be close to being morally bankrupt at this stage.

The Tory Remainers are now facing an existential moral dilemma. Party or country.

judeboy101

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

The Tory Remainers are now facing an existential moral dilemma. Party or country.

Pairing makes a farce of democracy. If you cant win a vote because one of your party cant make the vote, you should not be in charge.

fash

I understand the unresolvable flying rights the UK would ultimately lose (and which Varadkar was talking about) are the rights to fly from Paris to Berlin (etc.). Flights between Paris and London or Berlin and London are relatively easy to fix. For someone with knowledge to confirm however.

Professor Moriarty

judeboy101 wrote: »

Pairing makes a farce of democracy. If you cant win a vote because one of your party cant make the vote, you should not be in charge.

If you can't unite your party behind your policies you shouldn't be in charge. But May clings on.

ambro25

devnull wrote: »

Now being reported that the breach of the pairing agreement was not in fact a 'mistake' but may have been a deliberate ploy by the Tory Whips to make sure that they won all of the votes. (...).

Would it surprise anybody on here greatly, if I said that I’m wholly unsurprised by this revelation?

Maybe I’ve just grown too cynical (well past the point of no return, tbh)...but given the play of politics and media in the UK since February 2016, and the average level of capacity to analyse critically demonstrated by the lambda UK public -as perceived from interviews, social media activity, and actually being on the ground Oop North until Feb’18- there is simply nothing that surprises me over there.

Einstein’s quote (paraphrasing: human stupidity is boundless) has been proven true daily in the U.K. for months and years now, and still is, with no end in sight.

prawnsambo

judeboy101 wrote: »

Pairing makes a farce of democracy. If you cant win a vote because one of your party cant make the vote, you should not be in charge.

That's debatable. If the makeup of the parliament is a reflection of the people's will, then the absence of members through illness, other duties etc. would not reflect what people voted for. It would also be an incentive to 'nobble' members to affect the outcome of a vote in parliament.

J Mysterio

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

If you can't unite your party behind your policies you shouldn't be in charge. But May clings on.

"On Thursday morning the chair of the Brexit select committee in the Commons, Hilary Benn, warned May there was no majority in the Commons for her plan.

“While it’s prudent for the government to prepare for all eventualities, what the government really needs to be focusing on is getting a deal that can command a majority in parliament,” Benn said.

"He predicted that the public would turn against a no-deal Brexit as they became more aware of its implications. “I think the public needs to be told what the potential implications are, because I think the more the public engages with it, the less likely they are to say no-deal is OK, because it really isn’t OK,” he said."

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/jul/19/brexit-raab-and-barnier-to-meet-as-eu-steps-up-no-deal-warnings

Meanwhile, new Brexit secretary is due to meet Barnier today. His plan is to spell out the consequences of a no deal to the EU, despite the fact that the EU have done more work in this area, are circulating a document on this to the EU27 and are asking them to step up preparations for a no deal.

devnull

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

The Tory Remainers are now facing an existential moral dilemma. Party or country.

Thing is though with a proper opposition they'd have been seen off ages ago, but because Corbyn is so weak and a Brexiteer himself, the Tories have had a very lucky ride and have been getting away with doing all kinds of things they never would have been able to do with a credible opposition in place.

I see the likes of Chukka Umuna standing up to the Brexiteers again and again and I wonder how much more effective opposition Labour could have been if Corbyn took more of the same tack. Sure perhaps he's waiting for it to all blow up, but that doesn't benefit the country really by waiting till the situation gets more and more serious.

The trouble is I don't see a lot of these Tories defying the party, it's always the party first and since most of them are not exactly going to be in groups that are effected much either way due to their wealth, there is not really that much consequence for them putting the party first as it would be for the less well off.

You just have to see how the Tory remainers captiulate when they are threatened with things by the whips and leadership, which most are almost certainly idle threats anyway. I have no respect for the hard right of the Tory party whatsoever, but what I will say is at least they talk the talk and don't back down in the face of threats.

cml387

devnull wrote: »

Now being reported that the breach of the pairing agreement was not in fact a 'mistake' but may have been a deliberate ploy by the Tory Whips to make sure that they won all of the votes.

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/chief-whip-julian-smith-told-mps-to-defy-pairing-deals-r5rv59fm3

If that is indeed the case then it is extremely serious since it suggests that on top of all the scandal with vote leave and the Russian interference influencing the referendum, there is now also a lot of unethical things going on in relation to votes in the house.

I think the leavers must be close to being morally bankrupt at this stage.

It's not unique in the annals of history that the paring system has broken down. It happened in 1977, for the confidence vote that brought down Jim Callaghan.

Angrydwarf

How certain is a hard brexit now?

Professor Moriarty

devnull wrote: »

Thing is though with a proper opposition they'd have been seen off ages ago, but because Corbyn is so weak and a Brexiteer himself, the Tories have had a very lucky ride and have been getting away with doing all kinds of things they never would have been able to do with a credible opposition in place.

I see the likes of Chukka Umuna standing up to the Brexiteers again and again and I wonder how much more effective opposition Labour could have been if Corbyn took more of the same tack. Sure perhaps he's waiting for it to all blow up, but that doesn't benefit the country really by waiting till the situation gets more and more serious.

The trouble is I don't see a lot of these Tories defying the party, it's always the party first and since most of them are not exactly going to be in groups that are effected much either way due to their wealth, there is not really that much consequence for them putting the party first as it would be for the less well off.

You just have to see how the Tory remainers captiulate when they are threatened with things by the whips and leadership, which most are almost certainly idle threats anyway. I have no respect for the hard right of the Tory party whatsoever, but what I will say is at least they talk the talk and don't back down in the face of threats.

IMO, Corbyn was the main reason why Leave won. He's useless in so many ways that May is still more popular in the polls. But that's the way things are for Labour. If I were a betting man, I'd put a lot of money on a GE in September after the negotiations finally prove that a deal is impossible. The ramifications for the Tory party in that scenario would be dire. Hopefully.

Professor Moriarty

Angrydwarf wrote: »

How certain is a hard brexit now?

Today, more likely than not.

Imreoir2

judeboy101 wrote: »

Pairing makes a farce of democracy. If you cant win a vote because one of your party cant make the vote, you should not be in charge.

This is nonsense. Pairing is a normal practice, in a case where government is in power on a slim majority, pairing is often agreed to allow the government to function effectively.

Imagine a case where your foreign minister can't attend an international summit on Nuclear Weapons because they have to turn up for a vote on water charges. That is not how a normal democracy works.

Leroy42

Less than 9 months from a possible (probable) crash out and still the Brexiteers have nothing of substance to say. The point was brought up in this thread, that people should not pretend to know the ins and outs or airline regulations, but does anyone think that Davies (formally) and now Raab have?

Given that May couldn't answer a simply question on the collection of tariffs yesterday, and also that the civil service has been pointing out massive issues should the UK crash out for months in commons hearings, I doubt very much that the UK have given many of these things much thought.

Even Boris speech yesterday, full on whinge mode. It was akin to Trump complaining that healthcare was complicated. The NI border is difficult, surely ROI and EU should just let the UK have it as a no border and simply forget about it. Himself, and Davies speech previously, to me sound like a group that have no grasp of the instricities of what is facing them. And normally, that's fine. They are the grand scheme thinkings, the ideas. They let the minions in the civil service do the ground work. Except now they don't believe the experts, of the civil service so they are left with nothing but a scheme.

I would liken it to JFK saying that within the next decade the US will land on the moon. Brilliant, gets everyone excited. Then he hands it over to the boffins to make it happen. But instead, JFK wants to design, build and fly the spaceship himself and any problems will be down the gravity being a bully or the rotation of the earth want stop to let them work it out easier.

Nody

fash wrote: »

I understand the unresolvable flying rights the UK would ultimately lose (and which Varadkar was talking about) are the rights to fly from Paris to Berlin (etc.). Flights between Paris and London or Berlin and London are relatively easy to fix. For someone with knowledge to confirm however.

It's worse than that; let's say an Ryanair Irish serviced plane lands in London. The problem is if EU does not recognise UK's authority for certification & training (process can only start after UK has left to start certification as current certification is done via EU authority which goes away day 1 of Brexit and there is no way to do this before) the plane is not allowed to lift off because the technical review of the plane certifying it's in a state to fly is not valid in EU. Hence the plane could lift off but without passengers and would most likely need special landing permission with firefighters etc. on standby as the plane is not technically signed off to fly and hence landing is a high risk manoeuvrer.

Basically think of it like taking a plane and landing in a random small private airport outside of EU and refuel (by people not certified), get signed off to fly (by people not certified) and then return to EU and ask for permission to land. It's not your run of the mill event at the airport and would likely involve further technical checks required than normal before it's certified to be allowed to fly again as well.

seamus

cml387 wrote: »

It's not unique in the annals of history that the paring system has broken down. It happened in 1977, for the confidence vote that brought down Jim Callaghan.

Sure. But it just stinks to high heaven when the "democracy" drum has been banged every time someone suggests that Britain doesn't have to leave. Completely hypocrisy. Democracy is great as long as the Tories get the outcome they want.

Angrydwarf wrote: »

How certain is a hard brexit now?

Look, never say never. There are still 8 months, and we saw in 2016 that a lot can change in 8 months.

On the current path laid out, a hard Brexit seems very likely, perhaps with some level of a transitional period or a stay of execution. The EU don't want this either, so if the UK go to the EU on 30th March 2019 with a good exit strategy, but saying they need more time, then the EU will likely vote unanimously to allow it.
If they ask for more time but can't prove it'll be used any more wisely than they've used the last two years, then it'll be denied.

devnull

devnull wrote: »

Now being reported that the breach of the pairing agreement was not in fact a 'mistake' but may have been a deliberate ploy by the Tory Whips to make sure that they won all of the votes.

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/chief-whip-julian-smith-told-mps-to-defy-pairing-deals-r5rv59fm3

If that is indeed the case then it is extremely serious since it suggests that on top of all the scandal with vote leave and the Russian interference influencing the referendum, there is now also a lot of unethical things going on in relation to votes in the house.

I think the leavers must be close to being morally bankrupt at this stage.

Last month they made an 8+ month pregnant woman show up and another lady travelled from Birmingham on morphine in a wheelchair. I said it at the time, any semblance of decency is now gone.

Leroy42

seamus wrote: »

On the current path laid out, a hard Brexit seems very likely, perhaps with some level of a transitional period or a stay of execution. The EU don't want this either, so if the UK go to the EU on 30th March 2019 with a good exit strategy, but saying they need more time, then the EU will likely vote unanimously to allow it.
If they ask for more time but can't prove it'll be used any more wisely than they've used the last two years, then it'll be denied.

The only saving grace, is (I could be wrong so open to correction) that the PM does not have the votes to get a hard Brexit through the commons. Now, I freely admit, I am not really sure what happens in that case, Will they be asked to go and renegotiate? Bt then the likes of the ERG will simply vote down any new deal.

Nody

seamus wrote: »

if the UK go to the EU on 30th March 2019 with a good exit strategy, but saying they need more time, then the EU will likely vote unanimously to allow it.
If they ask for more time but can't prove it'll be used any more wisely than they've used the last two years, then it'll be denied.

Highlighted the critical path; I think EU would in general give an extension at this time simply to give their countries another year to prepare for crash out if possible no matter the plan from the UK. However this depends on UK actually asking for the extension and if you got a Brexiteer in charge that may not be the case (or someone like May who can be bullied into not asking for an extension since "a bad deal is worse than no deal").

cantwbr1

Nody wrote: »

Highlighted the critical path; I think EU would in general give an extension at this time simply to give their countries another year to prepare if possible no matter the plan from the UK. However this depends on UK actually asking for the extension and if you got a Brexiteer in charge that may not be the case (or someone like May who can be bullied into not asking for an extension since "a bad deal is worse than no deal").

And it seems that for ERG any deal is a bad deal

trellheim

Here's the detailed briefing from the UK POV .... see Section 3 for Aviation

http://researchbriefings.files.parliament.uk/documents/CBP-7633/CBP-7633.pdf

trellheim

On pairing agreements , there is history and tradition for this. If a "three line whip" is called all pairings are off or on a case-by-case basis https://www.parliament.uk/about/mps-and-lords/principal/whips/. In this case you see sick people being wheeled in to vote - although appalling thats the form.

However in this case an agreed pair was broken - which is the egregious part of it all.