Brexit discussion thread IV

Zubeneschamali

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.

Agreed. I wouldn't be surprised if the UK try to bluff the EU - Raab is apparently going to attempt to explain to the EU how bad a crashout will be for the EU this week - and when they finally realise no-one cares, suddenly cave and beg for an extension.

I would prefer a decent extension, let's say 5 years, rather than a year-on-year renewal when nothing is ready in 2020 either.

Leroy42

The problem with any extension is it brings the likelihood of Uk still being in place when the next budget is agreed, and as such they will have to continue to pay.

That seems a red rag to the Brexiteers.

Zubeneschamali

Leroy42 wrote: »

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.

I am not clear on why this matters. They already pulled the ripcord on brexit.

If Westminster goes on holidays now and passes nothing at all before the end of March 2019, they crash out

So when exactly is the House of Commons supposed to vote down a hard brexit? Why would the EU care?

Zubeneschamali

Leroy42 wrote: »

The problem with any extension is it brings the likelihood of Uk still being in place when the next budget is agreed, and as such they will have to continue to pay.

That seems a red rag to the Brexiteers.

If the UK had any sense, they'd have asked for an extension already - everyone knows they are not ready to leave next March. So I think the only way they admit they need an extension is if utter disaster is upon them. The Brexiteers are a noisy bunch, but most MPs will not actually want to recreate the crash of 1929 for fun.

prawnsambo

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

Agreed. I wouldn't be surprised if the UK try to bluff the EU - Raab is apparently going to attempt to explain to the EU how bad a crashout will be for the EU this week - and when they finally realise no-one cares, suddenly cave and beg for an extension.

I would prefer a decent extension, let's say 5 years, rather than a year-on-year renewal when nothing is ready in 2020 either.

I don't think that option is really feasible. It would be death by a thousand cuts. As it is, more and more companies are implementing their plan Bs. There are buildings going up in the Dublin docklands with very hush-hush clients to fill them. A friend pointed out one of those to me recently and although he knows who it's for, wouldn't tell me, except to say that it was a large financial institution moving from London.

LeinsterDub

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/politics/eu-calms-varadkar-s-fears-of-physical-border-checks-after-brexit-1.3569485

The European Union has reassured the Government that no physical checks will be needed on the Border even if the UK crashes out of the bloc without a deal, Taoiseach Leo Varadkar has said.

How could this possibly work? What about the WTO and most favored nation?

seamus

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 for crash out if possible no matter the plan from the UK.

I tend to agree, but I'm not sure the EU would agree.
Markets don't like uncertainty, people don't like uncertainty. The longer the uncertainty is allowed to continue, the more of a fall you're storing up for yourself.

And especially with the uncertainty about what the other side of the Atlantic is going to do, having this uncertainty hanging over us, leaves us a little exposed. The most prudent course of action might be just tearing off the plaster and getting it over with so we can stabilise and return certainty to the EU, and capitalise on the US and UK's distressed markets.

That is, unless the UK can present a plan which removes the uncertainty around their exit, which would then be beneficial for everyone.

Water John

Laws and Motions in Parliament don't have to be brought by the Gov'nt. If sufficient MPs across all parties are against a hard Brexit they can come together on an agreed Motion and force Govn't to implement it. The other option of Govn't is to resign. That gun may need be put to MPs heads.
We know a overwhelming majority in Parliament disagree with a crash out Brexit.
So MPs ignore the PM and Corbyn and do what is best for the people of the UK.
The key is to draw together a wide range of MPs to cobble this together.
Dominic Grieve or some such respected figure could be the figurehead.

Imreoir2

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

I am not clear on why this matters. They already pulled the ripcord on brexit.

If Westminster goes on holidays now and passes nothing at all before the end of March 2019, they crash out

So when exactly is the House of Commons supposed to vote down a hard brexit? Why would the EU care?

The idea is, afaik, that should it become apparent by the end of the year that there is no deal, then the pro-Europe MP's would be forced to band together on a government of national unity basis to pass legislation preventing a no-deal crash. They could, for example, elect a caretaker PM who will be instructed to either apply to extend Art 50 and begin talks on the basis of seeking a Norway+ deal, or perhaps even revoke Art 50 altogether and hold new elections in the UK. That is the threat to May and the ERG from the likes of Dominic Grieve.

Given the lackluster performance from the pro-Europe Tory rebels to date, I don't think they are capable of rupturing the party system and forming a pro-Europe caretaker government.

Call me Al

Imreoir2 wrote: »

The idea is, afaik, that should it become apparent by the end of the year that there is no deal, then the pro-Europe MP's would be forced to band together on a government of national unity basis to pass legislation preventing a no-deal crash. They could, for example, elect a caretaker PM who will be instructed to either apply to extend Art 50 and begin talks on the basis of seeking a Norway+ deal, or perhaps even revoke Art 50 altogether and hold new elections in the UK. That is the threat to May and the ERG from the likes of Dominic Grieve.

Given the lackluster performance from the pro-Europe Tory rebels to date, I don't think they are capable of rupturing the party system and forming a pro-Europe caretaker government.

Dominic Grieve referred to this on Newsnight two nights ago. It was sobering viewing as he talked about the crisis in government and essentially how he feared where this would end for the UK. He referred to possibly needing a national unity government.
All the while Marcus Fysh sat beside him saying if they didn't get Canada +++ then hard brexit was the only viable alternative for them. And he didn't expect EU to cave for the Chequers option so these brexiteers realise full well what's coming down the road, even if they don't talk about it publicly.

J Mysterio

Philip Davies MP of 1922 committee has put down a vote of no confidence in TM!

whatever_

Morning Ireland RTE Radio 1 19/07/18

So after two years of huffing, puffing and scaremongering about Brexit, finally the truth is revealed: in the event of the UK leaving the EU without a deal there will be absolutely no change whatsoever at the Irish border.

"Up to 1000" Customs Officials will have to be recruited says Varadkar. But no change at the Irish border.

Which doesn't impress the Sinn Fein Brexit spokesperson , who immediately inflates the number to 2000. He also believes that the "backstop" is designed to expediate east-west trade. Priceless.

Conscious that he might be pouring oil on troubled waters, Varadkar informs us that if Britain takes back it's waters then it will have no access to other peoples skies, and all the planes will be grounded. Thank God ! He's found something else to panic about ! Another petrol bomb lobbed at the British Empire by a disenfranchised teenager !

Meanwhile what about these "up to 1000" customs officials ? Well the top guy at Dublin Port thinks he needs "tens" of extra officials. When pressed by Dobbo - maybe a hundred or so (he can't believe his luck). Dublin Port accounts for more than 80% of Dublin's maritime container imports. Will there be kilometers of British trucks stuck in Dublin Port ? asks Dobbo hopefully. No says the man who actually knows something about this stuff.

What happens to these 1000 Customs Officials if the UK stays in the Customs Union ? Says Rachel (definitely not) English. Another pointless politician points out that the UK is not going to stay in the Customs Union. Nobody points out that Varadkar said "up to 1000" and that they probably haven't been hired yet - if indeed they ever will be.

Well in America at least it's only Trump that flails around in the dark spreading fake news. In Ireland we have the Government, the state broadcaster not to mention all the other clueless politicians and celebrities clogging up RTE with uninformed drivel about Brexit.

Absolutely priceless comedy gold !

ambro25

The EU Commission has released its communication advising to step up preparedness. I can’t see much of anything in there, that will be news to thread regulars. But it’s detailed yet in SimpleSpeak, so it makes a nice frame of regulatory reference in debates with Leavers.

judeboy101

Imreoir2 wrote: »

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.

If a government is so weak that they cannot win without pairing, they really shouldn't be in government. Imagine if we applied pairing to sports. Imagine klopp ringing up Jose and saying "well Salah can't play sat because he has Ramadan, so would you mind letting pogba sit it out?"

judeboy101

judeboy101 wrote: »

If a government is so weak that they cannot win without pairing, they really shouldn't be in government. Imagine if we applied pairing to sports. Imagine klopp ringing up Jose and saying "well Salah can't play sat because he has Ramadan, so would you mind letting pogba sit it out?"

Pairing does happen in sports. There are various examples over the years of a team letting the other score because a goal was unfair.

Your squad example is ridiculous though.

LeinsterDub

judeboy101 wrote: »

If a government is so weak that they cannot win without pairing, they really shouldn't be in government. Imagine if we applied pairing to sports. Imagine klopp ringing up Jose and saying "well Salah can't play sat because he has Ramadan, so would you mind letting pogba sit it out?"

I mean you have to know this analogy is a false equivalence

I'm sitting here wondering if the "Brexit dividend" to pay for the NHS is actually the import duties received by government.

J Mysterio

J Mysterio wrote: »

Philip Davies MP of 1922 committee has put down a vote of no confidence in TM!

Hmm. This wasn't as dramatic as I first thought, but the ball is certainly rolling.

"Conservative MP Philip Davies has submitted a letter of no confidence in Theresa May to the chair of the backbench 1922 Committee, saying he has “lost trust” in her ability to deliver the referendum result. According to the Yorkshire Post, the MP told his constituents that the prime minister’s Chequers plan for Brexit is “unacceptable”.

"He added: “Politics is all about trust and once it is lost it is impossible to win back. Many people have told me that as a result of this they have lost trust in the PM to properly and fully deliver the referendum result. It is with much sadness that I have to say that have also lost trust in her to deliver the referendum result too.

“Failure to keep our promise to the electorate will almost certainly lead to the catastrophe of Jeremy Corbyn becoming Prime Minister and I cannot sit back and allow that to happen.

"Therefore I have reluctantly come to the conclusion that I have no alternative but to send a letter to the Chairman of the 1922 Committee asking him for a vote of no confidence in the Prime Minister.

"For a no confidence vote to be triggered, 48 letters from Conservative MPs have to be sent to the chairman of the committee Graham Brady."

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brexit-latest-philip-davies-letter-of-no-confidence-theresa-may-conservative-leadership-race-a8454286.html

LeinsterDub

J Mysterio wrote: »

For a no confidence vote to be triggered, 48 letters from Conservative MPs have to be sent to the chairman of the committee Graham Brady.

Anyone know the current count?

devnull

LeinsterDub wrote: »

Anyone know the current count?

There was talk earlier in the week or last week that they believe they might have approx 40.

Hurrache

ambro25 wrote: »

I can’t see much of anything in there,

The section on Professional Qualifications did catch my eye, might be something as simple as applying for your qualification to continue to be recognised, or being forced to sit a test and the likes.

Citizens holding a professional qualification obtained in the United Kingdom should consider
whether it is advisable to obtain the recognition of a professional qualification in the EU27 while
the United Kingdom is still a Member State.
The Commission published a notice on EU rules on regulated professions and the recognition of
professional qualifications. It advises in particular EU nationals with UK professional qualifications
obtained prior to Brexit to consult relevant nationals authorities on the need to obtain recognition
ahead of 30 March 2019.

Water John

The Chairman of the Committee doesn't divulge that. So the person submitting such a letter doesn't know if there's is the actual one that triggers it until it has happened.
Irmreoir, great minds and all that. We both post the same idea within one minute of each other.

Professor Moriarty

Hurrache wrote: »

The section on Professional Qualifications did catch my eye, might be something as simple as applying for your qualification to continue to be recognised, or being forced to sit a test and the likes.

Christ! That affects me. Would you have a link to that please?

Zubeneschamali

prawnsambo wrote: »

I don't think that option is really feasible. It would be death by a thousand cuts.

For the UK, sure. Better than just cutting their own throats on April 1st though.

And for the EU, it would mean a smoother transition instead of a 1929 or 2008 crash.

seamus

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

Christ! That affects me. Would you have a link to that please?

https://ec.europa.eu/growth/content/brexit-%E2%80%93-guidance-stakeholders-impact-field-regulated-professions-and-recognition_en

An Ciarraioch

https://twitter.com/pmdfoster/status/1019895579785285633

prawnsambo

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

Christ! That affects me. Would you have a link to that please?

I'd say a lot of people don't know that. Spread the word I'd say.

Zubeneschamali

seamus wrote: »

Markets don't like uncertainty, people don't like uncertainty.

Uncertainty is better than certain doom.

Give the UK 5 years extension, and maybe the horse will learn to sing.

An Ciarraioch

Meanwhile, the euro is edging ever closer to the 90p psychological barrier:

https://xe.com/currencyconverter/convert/?Amount=1&From=EUR&To=GBP

Imreoir2

judeboy101 wrote: »

If a government is so weak that they cannot win without pairing, they really shouldn't be in government. Imagine if we applied pairing to sports. Imagine klopp ringing up Jose and saying "well Salah can't play sat because he has Ramadan, so would you mind letting pogba sit it out?"

Fair play often happens in sports, one team will kick the ball out of play if a player is injured to allow medical assistance and the opposition will kick it back to them when the game restarts, that kind of thing is dons even in a world cup final when everything is on the line.

It's easy to think that the oppositions only job is to try to bring down the government at the earliest opportunity. That's not how politics works in a mature democracy though. Opposition is supposed to make the governance of the country better, opposing government where it goes astray, engaging with the legislative process to improve legislation and sometimes supporting government in the national interest should that be necessary.

Simplistic opposition that would refuse a pairing system in the hopes of unseating the government at every vote does nothing more than make the lives of MP's unpleasant and makes the normal functioning of government worse for the country.