Brexit discussion thread V - No Pic/GIF dumps please

charlie14

Tell me how wrote: »

It's. f*cking. nonsense.

They suggested in the last week or so that there was time for a GE and for them to renegotiate with the EU before the 29th of March.

It's like telling a child that if they go to sleep now they can get up in an hour and watch television. It's embarrassing to be using such vacuous tactics.

It`s nonsense in any reasonably functioning democracy, but that is not what we are looking at in the UK. Labour just look to having seen the nonsense that carried the Brexit referendum and have decided the same nonsense is a viable option if it comes to a GE

Econ__

CelticRambler wrote: »

The backstop is still NI-specific; the EU has agreed to allow the NI-friendly terms of the transition to apply to the whole of the UK.

I don't understand what you mean here RE transition.

The backstop has two elements.

NI specific: Single market (for goods), The EU VAT regime and a full Customs Union.

UK-wide: Bare bones Customs Union.


FWIW, the backstop as is in the WA is very unlikely to ever come into effect because the UK-wide bare bones Customs Union is intolerably bad for the UK (they may as well flesh out a full Customs Union in the future relationship talks with the EU instead). It's designed for the UK to make a choice post 2019: Canada style FTA and modify the backstop to make it entirely NI specific, opt for a full Customs Union with the EU, or pursue a Norway+ deal.

Essentially, this agreement locks Northern Ireland into the EU's customs & regulatory sphere and allows the UK to kick the can down the road and delay the difficult decisions about the future relationship with the EU for another couple of years.

It's the NI specific backstop that the EU/Ireland were looking for all along via the backdoor. It's quite clever (and incidentally, an FT journalist suggested this route in July).

Tell me how

Enzokk wrote: »

What are they supposed to do though? They obviously feel that right now they cannot come out and state they want to ignore the referendum result. This is due to their leader being a euro skeptic and their MPs are probably getting noise from their constituents about Brexit as well.

They are in opposition and they should oppose the government. They are not there to make it easy for the Tories to stay in power. Unfortunately the path that is best for the country is no Brexit but that is very difficult to support for either parties. This doesn't make it right, just the way it is.

In saying all those things in their defence, they have been useless in opposition even with the open goal the Tories have been giving to them. This is due to their leader who seems to be in favour of leaving the EU so he is happy to get his cake and eat it as well. They could leave and he could be leader as well. Just another politician who will screw his voters for his own personal goals.

I think that sometimes parties (all parties, all countries) get too caught up in the literal sense of the term opposition. This leads to opposing what could be sensible policies purely because of a sense that they must object.

This is such a monumental event that I think that they should have offered to participate in a national governmental strategic group to aid with Brexit negotiations.

In Ireland, people complain about FF supporting FG with confidence and supply agreements and in September there was noise made from some within FF about calling a halt to this and angling for a GE. Micheal Martin said that a GE was not appropriate given what is going on with Brexit. While the true motivations for this may have been a belief that they were not strong enough to contest, I think it was better for the country to recognize the monumental events taking place.

I know I am speaking somewhat idealistically but it cannot be that the best people to form policy are always automatically going to be from the side which has managed to form a government.

Taking the literal approach in the case of Labour and Brexit is essentially hoping that it will be such a mess that they will be left in power as an outcome of it. That is not the best way to serve those that voted for you.

An Ciarraioch

Econ__ wrote: »

CelticRambler wrote: »

The backstop is still NI-specific; the EU has agreed to allow the NI-friendly terms of the transition to apply to the whole of the UK.

I don't understand what you mean here RE transition.

The backstop has two elements.

NI specific: Single market (for goods), The EU VAT regime and a full Customs Union.

UK-wide: Bare bones Customs Union.


FWIW, the backstop as is in the WA is very unlikely to ever come into effect because the UK-wide bare bones Customs Union is intolerably bad for the UK (they may as well flesh out a full Customs Union in the future relationship talks with the EU instead). It's designed for the UK to make a choice post 2019: Canada style FTA and modify the backstop to make it entirely NI specific, opt for a full Customs Union with the EU, or pursue a Norway+ deal.

Essentially, this agreement locks Northern Ireland into the EU's customs & regulatory sphere and allows the UK to kick the can down the road and delay the difficult decisions about the future relationship with the EU for another couple of years.

It's the NI specific backstop that the EU/Ireland were looking for all along via the backdoor. It's quite clever (and incidentally, an FT journalist suggested this route in July).

The Conservative MP Nick Boles is gradually realising what the only realistic alternative is - from "Norway for Now", he now admits that the UK would have to be a permanent EEA member, joining in such a way that a CU could be bolted on - the last step remaining for him is to accept that the backstop would still be in the treaty, even if rendered redundant:

http://twitter.com/NickBoles/status/1066635582690992128

Water John

LB largely will back a Deal that has UK staying in the CU and SM. Problem for TM is that would split her Party apart.

Enzokk

Tell me how wrote: »

I think that sometimes parties (all parties, all countries) get too caught up in the literal sense of the term opposition. This leads to opposing what could be sensible policies purely because of a sense that they must object.

This is such a monumental event that I think that they should have offered to participate in a national governmental strategic group to aid with Brexit negotiations.

In Ireland, people complain about FF supporting FG with confidence and supply agreements and in September there was noise made from some within FF about calling a halt to this and angling for a GE. Micheal Martin said that a GE was not appropriate given what is going on with Brexit. While the true motivations for this may have been a belief that they were not strong enough to contest, I think it was better for the country to recognize the monumental events taking place.

I know I am speaking somewhat idealistically but it cannot be that the best people to form policy are always automatically going to be from the side which has managed to form a government.

Taking the literal approach in the case of Labour and Brexit is essentially hoping that it will be such a mess that they will be left in power as an outcome of it. That is not the best way to serve those that voted for you.

I agree with you that opposition shouldn't mean you always oppose everything the other one proposes. At the same time by voting for a policy from the government you will not get recognition if it is a success and if it fails you get blamed for supporting it. In a 2 party system as opposition you are there to oppose and that is where Labour is.

Akrasia

O'Neill wrote: »

I really don't think a peope's vote is going to solve anything. In fact in my opinion it will make things worse. I honestly think we just need to see this nonsense out.

If the problem is the UK leaving the EU, a 2nd referendum could solve it by voting to remain in the EU.

It's not that complicated

Will the brexiteers be annoyed if their party gets cancelled? Sure, but they're gonna be annoyed no matter what so screw em. If they get May's brexit they'll never shut up. If they get a crash out brexit, they'll blame everyone else for the chaos that happens afterwards and may even use it as a pretext to drive their supporters even further to the right

The kinds of chaos that would happen after a no deal brexit would be fertile breeding ground for right wing populists to drum up support

If the UK remain in the EU, they will have dodged a very serious bullet and the remainers won't be liable to take the EU for granted the way they have for the last 30 years

Anthracite

LeinsterDub wrote: »

Corbin hates the EU. Simple as. He wants out too

The nightmare scenario is that he wants out and reckons that a crash-out Brexit can be blamed on the Tories for decades to come.

Akrasia

He would be right. A crash out would be entirely the fault of the Tories.

But, a lot of people will remember just how craven Corbyn was during this period and how they put absolutely no pressure on May to pull them back from the brink and avoid disaster.

If the UK crash out, the Tories are finished, but Labour will be deeply wounded.

ancapailldorcha

Akrasia wrote: »

He would be right. A crash out would be entirely the fault of the Tories.

But, a lot of people will remember just how craven Corbyn was during this period and how they put absolutely no pressure on May to pull them back from the brink and avoid disaster.

If the UK crash out, the Tories are finished, but Labour will be deeply wounded.

They have the advantage of being in opposition though. "Labour opened the floodgates" and "Labour overspent" will soon be replaced with similar aphorisms about the Conservative party. Corbyn knows this. All he has to do is to wait.

Infini

Anthracite wrote: »

The nightmare scenario is that he wants out and reckons that a crash-out Brexit can be blamed on the Tories for decades to come.

Which would be foolish since he would quickly come under fire for being utterly inept and unwilling to do his job because hes a closet Brexiteer.

S.M.B.

If there was a GE tomorrow I'd genuinely have no idea who I'd vote for which is depressing.

First Up

Hurrache wrote: »

First Up wrote: »

Its the only deal they will get.

I know, that's my point.

"Best" implies there are others. There aren't.

cml387

Did anyone read the Sunday Times magazine today?
Interesting piece about Seamus Milne, the power behind Corbyn.

He seems to have a stranglehold on Labour. He put it in the ear of Labour politicians not to go to the People's march a few weeks ago.

His support for Putin during the Ukrainian crisis and the annexation of Crimea when he worked for the Guardian led to a huge row in their offices.

Shortly after Corbyn was elected he took "Leave of absence" from the Guardian and his job there remains open.

Now I don't normally hold to conspiracy theories but there are far too many threads leading back to Russia for this not to look like a very murky set of circumstances.

Capt'n Midnight

Water John wrote: »

It's hard to identify which is The Monster Raving Lunatic Party.

Who is the woman in orange ?
https://pics.me.me/guardian-politics-gdnpolitics-12h-v-not-sure-how-to-explain-22538929.png

Capt'n Midnight

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

They have the advantage of being in opposition though. "Labour opened the floodgates" and "Labour overspent" will soon be replaced with similar aphorisms about the Conservative party. Corbyn knows this. All he has to do is to wait.

UK national debt has shot up under the Tories. Despite all the cutbacks and austerity.

https://www.ukpublicspending.co.uk/uk_national_debt_analysis

McGiver

LeinsterDub wrote:

Corbin hates the EU. Simple as. He wants out too

Yeah, cuz the EU is neoliberal capitalist conspiracy. While the hard right insist it's a Communist/Socialist/neomarxist conspiracy.

EU is a universal unicorn, whatever you want it to be - the EU serves as a scapegoat for all populists and charlatans.

Rhineshark

Capt'n Midnight wrote: »

UK national debt has shot up under the Tories. Despite all the cutbacks and austerity.

https://www.ukpublicspending.co.uk/uk_national_debt_analysis

Huh. What was it that they'd nearly cleared by the austerity program? I thought it was the debt but maybe it was just one part of it.

RobMc59

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

They have the advantage of being in opposition though. "Labour opened the floodgates" and "Labour overspent" will soon be replaced with similar aphorisms about the Conservative party. Corbyn knows this. All he has to do is to wait.

Don't you think that if Corbyn at least showed the country what he's thinking-at the moment it does look like he's sitting like a spider waiting to pounce and his motives are being questioned-is he doing it for the good of the people or his own ends?

ancapailldorcha

RobMc59 wrote: »

Don't you think that if Corbyn at least showed the country what he's thinking-at the moment it does look like he's sitting like a spider waiting to pounce and his motives are being questioned-is he doing it for the good of the people or his own ends?

He's obviously convinced that his ideology is for the common good but yes, he is doing it because it will get him into power.

Hammer Archer

In my work, we're seeing direct consequences of Brexit. I work in the pharmaceutical industry and a lot of the products that we release would be manufactured outside the EU. EU regulations state that these products must be tested by a registered EU lab (with the exception of countries like Australia and Switzerland where mutual recognition agreements are in place).
We have a good few contract labs across the EU that carry out this testing for us. But the lab we use most often is in the UK. They're an extremely reliable lab and we give them the guts of £1 million per year as payment (more if you include our sister companies that also use them). They employ around 30-40 people and are very good at what they do.

But now, through no fault of their own, we have to pull out of this lab and move to those in EU countries. It's likely that this lab will go out of business or, at the very least, have to lay off the majority of their workforce as a direct result of Brexit. This is because, at this point, we will not be able to release products to EU markets based on this lab's testing as they will no longer be in the EU and no MRA will be in place. Dozens of jobs probably gone as a direct result of Brexit. I feel extremely sorry for them but there really is no alternative.

demfad

Just an update on Brexit-Russia-Trump which may yet play a role:

• Up to date analysis of connections here by Carole Cadwalladr. https://www.nybooks.com/daily/2018/11/16/why-britain-needs-its-own-mueller/
• New connections Between Aaron Banks and Cambridge Analytica/Bannon in 2015: https://www.newyorker.com/news/news-desk/new-evidence-emerges-of-steve-bannon-and-cambridge-analyticas-role-in-brexit
• Theresa May Blocked an investigation into Aoron Banks £8 million as Home secretary just before the EU referendum. https://www.opendemocracy.net/uk/brexitinc/peter-geoghegan-and-jenna-corderoy/theresa-may-accused-of-major-cover-up-over-brexit-do
• The Wikileaks indictments are this week (most likely) in US. Will Farage be implicated?
  A roundup of his Russian associations here. Look at what happens when his Aide Cotrell was indicted by FBI agents in Farage's company. Farages team sent the details of teh indictments to the Russian ambassador in London. https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/nov/25/why-wont-nigel-farage-answer-my-brexit-questions?CMP=share_btn_tw
• Sargeant at arms sent to retrieve documents relating to Facebook for Commons inquiry into Disinformation. https://www.politicshome.com/news/uk/technology/data/news/100115/mps-send-serjeant-arms-seize-secret-facebook-papers

Tell me how

Hammer Archer wrote: »

In my work, we're seeing direct consequences of Brexit. I work in the pharmaceutical industry and a lot of the products that we release would be manufactured outside the EU. EU regulations state that these products must be tested by a registered EU lab (with the exception of countries like Australia and Switzerland where mutual recognition agreements are in place).
We have a good few contract labs across the EU that carry out this testing for us. But the lab we use most often is in the UK. They're an extremely reliable lab and we give them the guts of £1 million per year as payment (more if you include our sister companies that also use them). They employ around 30-40 people and are very good at what they do.

But now, through no fault of their own, we have to pull out of this lab and move to those in EU countries. It's likely that this lab will go out of business or, at the very least, have to lay off the majority of their workforce as a direct result of Brexit. This is because, at this point, we will not be able to release products to EU markets based on this lab's testing as they will no longer be in the EU and no MRA will be in place. Dozens of jobs probably gone as a direct result of Brexit. I feel extremely sorry for them but there really is no alternative.

Real world impact right there.
I'm sure this wasn't something which happened overnight.

What did this company try to do to allay fears? Did they approach ye to discuss potential implications or have ye had any discussions and are instead just starting to divert the work elsewhere?

Enzokk

demfad wrote: »

Just an update on Brexit-Russia-Trump which may yet play a role:

• The Wikileaks indictments are this week (most likely) in US. Will Farage be implicated?
  A roundup of his Russian associations here. Look at what happens when his Aide Cotrell was indicted by FBI agents in Farage's company. Farages team sent the details of teh indictments to the Russian ambassador in London. https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/nov/25/why-wont-nigel-farage-answer-my-brexit-questions?CMP=share_btn_tw

Thank you for the list, that story on Farage seems like it should be out of a novel than real life. Either he and those he hangs out with are just unlucky when they happened to meet coincidentally with the Russians or the Russian Embassy, or they are knee deep in subversion of democracy at the hands of Russia. I see way too many meetings that would mean a coincidence for them to stick to that claim.

LeinsterDub

Boris Johnson is facing accusations of hypocrisy after a letter leaked to The Times revealed that he gave his reluctant blessing to checks on trade between Great Britain and Northern Ireland while he was foreign secretary.

It comes after he flaunted his unionist credentials in an address to the DUP conference, suggesting that such checks would be unconscionable.

Remember BoJo the Unionist from the weekend? Well him and BoJo the brexiter are having a bit of a disagreement. Let's hope BoJo the remainder from 2016 doesn't turn up too.

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/brexit-boris-johnson-voiced-support-for-checks-at-irish-border-p5wr239ks

lawred2

Tell me how wrote: »

Real world impact right there.
I'm sure this wasn't something which happened overnight.

What did this company try to do to allay fears? Did they approach ye to discuss potential implications or have ye had any discussions and are instead just starting to divert the work elsewhere?

What could they do? it's out of their hands. They will no longer have the regulatory approval to test products for the EU market without mutual recognition in place..

Short of moving the lab to Ireland - they were torpedoed in the short term.

Unless mutual recognition can be sorted by Brexit day? But again that's dice rolling for any customer of this company.

Tell me how

lawred2 wrote: »

What could they do? it's out of their hands. They will no longer have the regulatory approval to test products for the EU market without mutual recognition in place..

Short of moving the lab to Ireland - they were torpedoed in the short term.

Unless mutual recognition can be sorted by Brexit day? But again that's dice rolling for any customer of this company.

I'm quite sure they didn't just sit on their hands and succumb to their fate.....

End result may have been the same but I expect they at least tried to explore what the future might hold over the last few months.

I'm curious about that.

EdgeCase

lawred2 wrote: »

What could they do? it's out of their hands. They will no longer have the regulatory approval to test products for the EU market without mutual recognition in place..

Short of moving the lab to Ireland - they were torpedoed in the short term.

Unless mutual recognition can be sorted by Brexit day? But again that's dice rolling for any customer of this company.

Why isn't this company going to every paper in the country?

I just do not get British industry. They're sitting in relative silence while this stuff is going on around them. I'm actually surprised that they're that passive. Either they're living in magic unicorn land and think that everything's going to be fine or they're afraid to speak in case they get backlash.

Can you imagine if the Government here did something that had this kind of negative impact here? There'd be absolute outrage on Joe Duffy and elsewhere about job losses and how the policy is destroying their export contracts. You'd have articles in every paper and all over the media and the various industry bodies would absolutely not sit there in silence as their market access was pulled up from under them.

It looks like the 'project fear' chants worked to silence any criticism.

lawred2

EdgeCase wrote: »

Why isn't this company going to every paper in the country?

I just do not get British industry. They're sitting in relative silence while this stuff is going on around them. I'm actually surprised that they're that passive. Either they're living in magic unicorn land and think that everything's going to be fine or they're afraid to speak in case they get backlash.

Can you imagine if the Government here did something that had this kind of negative impact here? There'd be absolute outrage on Joe Duffy and elsewhere about job losses and how the policy is destroying their export contracts.

It looks like the 'project fear' chants worked to silence any criticism.

I actually saw something on BBC news a while back about a company involved in either medical device testing or pharma product testing that was warning about this exact problem..

Fairly sure that they were based in Wales somewhere.

EdgeCase

lawred2 wrote: »

I actually saw something on BBC news a while back about a company involved in either medical device testing or pharma product testing that was warning about this exact problem..

Fairly sure that they were based in Wales somewhere.

The problem though at this stage is that it's already too late for that kind of stuff. The business community absolutely failed to challenge this in any meaningful way and they're clearly out of the loop when it comes to lobbying as they've had no impact.

I'm starting to see reports beginning to mention the words 'politically unstable' in reference to the UK which is really dire for FDI and even domestic companies' expansion plans.