Brexit discussion thread V - No Pic/GIF dumps please

Enzokk

Peregrinus wrote: »

My sources at court tell me that HMG had been quietly lobbying Washington over the past few days from some supportive noises about the deal, which might help May sell it to those Brexiters who obsess about a US/UK trade deal.

Good to see Trump burnishing his reputation as a good friend, a rock of co-operation and encouragement.

And yet you will have the UK playing up to their "special" status with the US. They must like the abuse that the US likes to send their way.

Iderown wrote: »

Even if the present deal is accepted the UK government could well sit on its hands for the two years (telling all how wonderful it is) and then end with no trade deals or other necessary internal UK processes. OK - I'm a pessimist.

As others have mentioned before if they do nothing then the backstop kicks in and at least there is no border on the island. However it doesn't solve anything for the UK. What about medicines? What about air travel? If they do nothing they are still committing suicide. Their politicians in charge know the cost of leaving without a deal, hence they have given in to the EU deal. Unless a politician is willing to risk millions of jobs they will accept the EU deal. There is nothing else.

Peregrinus wrote: »

But, more to the point, even if HMG changes its mind and seeks to remain (whether with or without the backing of a second referendum) I think it's clear at this stage that the UK will remain bitterly divided on this question. So you'd be taking on a UK that was more discontented as a member than ever before, with a large minority feeling they have been cheated and betrayed and a political establishment, on both sides, clearly dominated by leaders who seem not to be committed to or enthusiastic about the European project. At the very least, a future British government would find it very hard, for domestic reasons, to agree to any reform of, or deepening integration of, the Union. Yet the need for some reform is widely accepted in Europe, even if politically difficult to bring about. Why make make the reform of the Union even more difficult by given the UK a weighty voice in the process?

In short, while the Union is sad to see the UK go, they've got used to the idea and the notion of the UK sticking around after all might not be entirely welcome. If nothing else, EU assent to the withdrawal of A50 notice might well come with conditions designed to ensure that UK exceptionalism cannot be allowed to forestall the development of the Union in whatever way the other Member States might agree. And those conditions might be very hard for Westminster to swallow.

I agree with your post, but there is more information out there now for people to know that if they stay and the people that still want to leave the EU will have to convince people to vote against their livelihoods to do so, if they were to remain in the EU that is.

I would seriously doubt the next politicians in charge of the campaign to remain if they cannot put forth a convincing argument on the available evidence of the last 2.5 years or so since the referendum. The other side may try to shout project fear again but we know it is not project fear but reality.

Leroy42

No way Brexit is being cancelled. The line of 'will of the people' has been a catchall to allow every MP to basically do whatever they wanted (once it was in support of Brexit) but now that it has been used so much anything that even smells like a reversal will see a massive backlash. The EU has been used as a scapegoat for years, there is no way the MP's are going to want that turned on them.

Look at the backlash against TM plan. People still think they should be doing far better, they still have not faced reality.

Even yesterday, JRM was up in the HoC asking what they were getting for the payment of £39bn and surely they should just not pay it. It is that level of crazy thinking that is driving this and no amount of sanity is going to derail it.

TBF, I think TM actually ended up with a pretty good deal. I think she got a couple of small, but important moves from the EU. But they are still living on the basis that the EU needs them and a deal will be done in a jiffy. I heard a call in on R5live yesterday, and a caller actually said that he wanted TM replaced by Davis as Davis would get the deal done. When the presenter stated that Davis had failed at every level the caller simply said that TM and Ollie Robbins and stabbed him in the back and been working with the EU to keep the UK in from the very start.

With the level of ignorance there is no hope.

Enzokk

Seems like their are murmurings of a debate between Corbyn and May about Brexit. I don't know why though, do you really want to listen to May spouting statistics and avoiding the questions while Corbyn fights for, whaterver he wants that is not what his party wants?

Labour to block People's Vote taking part in Brexit TV debate

Labour will not allow a representative of the People’s Vote campaign to take part in any televised Brexit debate involving Theresa May and Jeremy Corbyn, with the party instead pushing for a format that would allow the opposition leader to criticise the prime minister’s domestic policies.

May’s team has proposed holding a live primetime TV debate ahead of a crunch parliamentary vote next month on Britain’s exit from the EU, prompting a discussion over the debate format and which broadcaster would host it.

It also led to calls from parties that support a second EU referendum – including the Scottish National party, the Green party and the Liberal Democrats – to have a representative on the panel.

So basically a hour long or 90 minutes of PMQs where Corbyn will talk about the NHS and austerity and May will shout about how her deal is the best thing for the UK. No-one from the ERG to debate going to WTO or anyone asking for a second vote. Great idea by 2 incompetent parties in charge in the UK right now.

As for the case on article 50, here seems to be a thread to follow throughout the day, or however long it will be for the arguments.

https://twitter.com/adamfleming/status/1067335420449570816

And to add to the Trump comments, we have some of those leading the call for Brexit displaying their brilliant knowledge of anything really.

https://twitter.com/SuzanneEvans1/status/1067319728287490048

So when Obama had things to say he had to stay out of it, but because the liar and bully Trump says anything they have to listen? There really needs to be a review in the UK where politicians are held to their words. They are just allowed to do and say what they want right now without any repercussions. I really don't count possible losing their seat as a consequence for letting people go into poverty and other horrible consequences of their policies brought on by lies.

Enzokk

Leroy42 wrote: »

No way Brexit is being cancelled. The line of 'will of the people' has been a catchall to allow every MP to basically do whatever they wanted (once it was in support of Brexit) but now that it has been used so much anything that even smells like a reversal will see a massive backlash. The EU has been used as a scapegoat for years, there is no way the MP's are going to want that turned on them.

Look at the backlash against TM plan. People still think they should be doing far better, they still have not faced reality.

Even yesterday, JRM was up in the HoC asking what they were getting for the payment of £39bn and surely they should just not pay it. It is that level of crazy thinking that is driving this and no amount of sanity is going to derail it.

TBF, I think TM actually ended up with a pretty good deal. I think she got a couple of small, but important moves from the EU. But they are still living on the basis that the EU needs them and a deal will be done in a jiffy. I heard a call in on R5live yesterday, and a caller actually said that he wanted TM replaced by Davis as Davis would get the deal done. When the presenter stated that Davis had failed at every level the caller simply said that TM and Ollie Robbins and stabbed him in the back and been working with the EU to keep the UK in from the very start.

With the level of ignorance there is no hope.

People are still being fed lies and that is the problem. You cannot really be angry if someone has the wrong information but that information is given to them by someone that is supposed to have their interests in their actions.

I will not lie and say seeing the UK get their comeuppance with Brexit will not only be a little funny but what they deserve, but decent people will die if the likes of JRM and DD get their way. Maybe the way to let the UK get on the right path again (who decides this path though? At the moment the "right" path is the one where Ireland gets the least amount of damage) is to let them self harm themselves. Its one of the pieces of advice I have seen people say about addicts, you cannot force them to go to rehab as they have to make the decision themselves to change. But there is a risk that the person will kill themselves before they realise they want to change. Do we want to risk the UK going into meltdown?

FreudianSlippers

prinzeugen wrote: »

Look at the back of a €50 note. There are more French and Spanish colonies there than British.

What?

Peregrinus

Financial Times Brussels correspondent live-tweets the CJEU hearing today on whether A50 notice can be revoked:

https://twitter.com/MehreenKhn/status/1067325301225648128

(Note that in the CJEU, oral hearings are quite short, and most of what the parties say to the court is said in written submissions, before the hearing.)

lawred2

FreudianSlippers wrote: »

What?

why did you do that to yourself?

FreudianSlippers

lawred2 wrote: »

why did you do that to yourself?

God that image is giant. Deleted before I get permabanned for it.

CrabRevolution

Have any of the "we'll renegotiate before March" crowd actually justified their stance or explained what new tactic or leverage they'll use to extract a better deal from the EU?

Or is it all just "we'll demand everything and they'll give us what we want because we're British" type stuff, despite having repeatedly hit a brick wall when trying that tactic with the EU for the last 2 years?

lawred2

FreudianSlippers wrote: »

God that image is giant. Deleted before I get permabanned for it.

No I mean - why did you bother checking his claims?

tuxy

FreudianSlippers wrote: »

God that image is giant. Deleted before I get permabanned for it.

Has to be that size to see the Portuguese archipelagos off Affrica and the Spanish enclaves in Morroco
Maybe that's what prinzeugen was talking about

Professor Moriarty

Trump's one-liner is the main headline on the Telegraph's website. It really is pathetic when a once great country like Britain is reduced to debating a throwaway comment by an authoritarian, lying clown who couldn't find Britain on the map let alone have the wit to comment on a potential trade deal. Such is the pathetic depths to which the likes of Mogg, Farage and Johnson have dragged political discourse in Britain.

LeinsterDub

Enzokk wrote: »

People are still being fed lies and that is the problem. You cannot really be angry if someone has the wrong information but that information is given to them by someone that is supposed to have their interests in their actions.

Maybe not angry but disappointed the right information is at their finger tips. People aren't being fed lies they are actively looking to eat lies. You can't help those who don't want to be helped

Leroy42

LeinsterDub wrote: »

Maybe not angry but disappointed the right information is at their finger tips. People aren't being fed lies that are actively looking to eat lies. You can't help those who don't want to be helped

Exactly. I do agree that the largest part of the anger should be directed at the likes of Farage, Johnson, JRM etc, but people need to look at themselves. We are in the information age yet there are many that simply don't care to educate themselves.

Whatever about being lied to during the campaign, for which the leaders and media are largely to blame, there is ample evidence to show that they were lied to yet instead of asking questions of Johnson etc, they have labelled TM a traitor, an EU mole working to keep the UK in. IN other words, they have made up their own reality to avoid having to face reality.

Of course this is largely driven by the media, I get that, but simply asking 'so what is your plan' would be a start.

McGiver

LeinsterDub wrote: »

Maybe not angry but disappointed the right information is at their finger tips. People aren't being fed lies that are actively looking to eat lies. You can't help those who don't want to be helped

While the Russians hit again using the chaos to hide their moves.

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/11/26/world/europe/russia-ukraine-kerch-strait.html

https://twitter.com/eucopresident/status/1067021445174317056

Enzokk

LeinsterDub wrote: »

Maybe not angry but disappointed the right information is at their finger tips. People aren't being fed lies that are actively looking to eat lies. You can't help those who don't want to be helped

Sure, but people that fall for a conman doesn't want to be conned out of their money. If you take the liar out of the equation then you shouldn't have the misinformation out there for people to believe. Will they make up their own lies?

Zubeneschamali

CrabRevolution wrote: »

Have any of the "we'll renegotiate before March" crowd actually justified their stance or explained what new tactic or leverage they'll use to extract a better deal from the EU?

The actual noise from the Brexiteers seems to be "Norway would be better than this!", which would be a closer relationship with the EU, and the EU might indeed go for it.

I would ignore all the "This deal or no deal!" talk from the EU - they have to say that. Obviously any new deal will have to include all the hard stuff in this one - backstop, citizens rights, settle the £40 billion bar bill on the way out. But the political declaration is just waffle and could be torn up and replaced with new waffle rather easily.

trellheim

Peregrinus's posts above struck a chord.

While the EU project causes many problems for member states ( see EU Army and increased Federalism , long list, take your pick) somehow the other 27 don't have a problem staying in. If a condition of staying in was driving on the right ( for example - I was going to say Schengen
but rolled back from that lol ) can be the screeching from the Dail would be long and loud . But would we leave the EU over it ? Also leaving with no say and becoming a rule taker - and no matter what anyone says I just cant see them getting a fabulous trade deal cos why doesnt Norway get that ?

TM bangs on and on about FOM its always first thing with her

BonnieSituation

Peregrinus wrote: »

France has six "overseas countries and territories" which are in a special relationship with the EU, though not part of it. Spain has one. The UK has thirteen.

And France also has the temerity to think of citizens in these territories as equal with those Metropolitan France unlike the hodge podge of British Subjugations.

ancapailldorcha

trellheim wrote: »

While the EU project causes many problems for member states ( see EU Army and increased Federalism , long list, take your pick) somehow the other 27 don't have a problem staying in. If a condition of staying in was driving on the right ( for example - I was going to say Schengen
but rolled back from that lol ) can be the screeching from the Dail would be long and loud . But would we leave the EU over it ? Also leaving with no say and becoming a rule taker - and no matter what anyone says I just cant see them getting a fabulous trade deal cos why doesnt Norway get that ?

TM bangs on and on about FOM its always first thing with her

What are you basing these problems on? What is the extent of this EU army and how many problems has it caused? Same for the "increased federalism"?

trellheim

What is the extent of this EU army

Well; there isn't one. That has not stopped people calling for one https://www.politico.eu/article/angela-merkel-emmanuel-macron-eu-army-to-complement-nato/ .

Best we can do is EU Battlegroups which are not the same thing at all


And it has not stopped people being worried about it as you can imagine.

As for federalism https://www.ozy.com/need-to-know/special-briefing-the-future-of-europe-dossier/90705

Again - these are directions the EU can take. Does the EU levy taxes ? No. Should it ? worth a discussion - sure.

My point ( I suppose ) was really - if 26 other EU countries decided to have a federal armed force would we leave the EU ? If not then what change in the EU would make us invoke Article 50 ? It would need a huge shift to do so.

Imreoir2

trellheim wrote: »

Well; there isn't one. That has not stopped people calling for one https://www.politico.eu/article/angela-merkel-emmanuel-macron-eu-army-to-complement-nato/ .

Best we can do is EU Battlegroups which are not the same thing at all


And it has not stopped people being worried about it as you can imagine.

As for federalism https://www.ozy.com/need-to-know/special-briefing-the-future-of-europe-dossier/90705

Again - these are directions the EU can take. Does the EU levy taxes ? No. Should it ? worth a discussion - sure.

My point ( I suppose ) was really - if 26 other EU countries decided to have a federal armed force would we leave the EU ? If not then what change in the EU would make us invoke Article 50 ? It would need a huge shift to do so.

Your point as I read it is that the EU causes many problems for member states, and you sited the EU Army and Federalism as examples. Unless discussion of an EU army and EU Federalism is the problem, then I am not sure how they are examples of the "many problems for member states" the EU has caused.

RobMc59

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

The actual noise from the Brexiteers seems to be "Norway would be better than this!", which would be a closer relationship with the EU, and the EU might indeed go for it.

I would ignore all the "This deal or no deal!" talk from the EU - they have to say that. Obviously any new deal will have to include all the hard stuff in this one - backstop, citizens rights, settle the £40 billion bar bill on the way out. But the political declaration is just waffle and could be torn up and replaced with new waffle rather easily.

Your assessment is reasonably balanced unlike some others on this forum who allow personal issues with the UK to cloud their judgement.If the TM deal is rejected the EU would probably negotiate with a different government although if this deal is rejected surely remaining is the `no brainer`alternative?The EU have said on many occasions that the decision to leave can be reversed-it would be business-not personal.

Leroy42

I think the issue with renegotiation is that the UK seem to think that they will go over there and just be more demanding. But in effect, the EU will have all the cards since the UK has decided against No deal and cannot simply reverse Brexit.

So lets take the, not unreasonable, position that should the deal fail in the HoC, TM or some other leader comes back to the EU looking for something extra (like we did with Lisbon). What are the UK going to offer the EU to get something additional in the deal, as the starting position will now be taken as the deal from the EU POV.

So what plan have the UK got, what are they willing to sacrifice to gain? Nobody has made it clear. The EU are not simply going to give in extra stuff. My bet would be fishing rights and Gibraltar would move back centre stage. Are the UK willing to move on them? What about NI, forget the backstop and simply leave NI within the EU?

If you look at all of the Brexiteers calling for renegotiation, none of them actually lay out what they will offer in return. And that has been the core problem throughout. The has never come to terms that they will not, ever, get everything they want and need to offer something to get something in return.

trellheim

Your point as I read it is that the EU causes many problems for member states, and you sited the EU Army and Federalism as examples. Unless discussion of an EU army and EU Federalism is the problem, then I am not sure how they are examples of the "many problems for member states" the EU has caused.

OK you are picking me up wrong. To take one point to illustrate

1) We do not currently have a EU Army.
2) There are proposals for one - as linked above.
3) If the EU voted 26 to 1 for an EU Army, would we leave ? Would that be enough for Ireland to put in an Article 50 ?

If you don't like EU Army replace it with "common corporation tax base" .

The UK is leaving for its own reasons - I think our threshold would be higher.

flatty

Leroy42 wrote: »

I think the issue with renegotiation is that the UK seem to think that they will go over there and just be more demanding. But in effect, the EU will have all the cards since the UK has decided against No deal and cannot simply reverse Brexit.

So lets take the, not unreasonable, position that should the deal fail in the HoC, TM or some other leader comes back to the EU looking for something extra (like we did with Lisbon). What are the UK going to offer the EU to get something additional in the deal, as the starting position will now be taken as the deal from the EU POV.

So what plan have the UK got, what are they willing to sacrifice to gain? Nobody has made it clear. The EU are not simply going to give in extra stuff. My bet would be fishing rights and Gibraltar would move back centre stage. Are the UK willing to move on them? What about NI, forget the backstop and simply leave NI within the EU?

If you look at all of the Brexiteers calling for renegotiation, none of them actually lay out what they will offer in return. And that has been the core problem throughout. The has never come to terms that they will not, ever, get everything they want and need to offer something to get something in return.

I think that labour would actually try to negotiate a softer brexit. One that meets their six criteria. Id imagine the eu would be open to this.

An Ciarraioch

Jolyon Maugham has posted the full minutes from the Article 50 hearing - EU position seems to allow possibility of revocation, but that European Council unanimity would be needed to avoid abuse of the provision (i.e. members invoking and promptly withdrawing the article willy-nilly):

https://goodlawproject.org/resources-article-50-hearing/

demfad

Leroy42 wrote: »

I think the issue with renegotiation is that the UK seem to think that they will go over there and just be more demanding. But in effect, the EU will have all the cards since the UK has decided against No deal and cannot simply reverse Brexit.

So lets take the, not unreasonable, position that should the deal fail in the HoC, TM or some other leader comes back to the EU looking for something extra (like we did with Lisbon). What are the UK going to offer the EU to get something additional in the deal, as the starting position will now be taken as the deal from the EU POV.

So what plan have the UK got, what are they willing to sacrifice to gain? Nobody has made it clear. The EU are not simply going to give in extra stuff. My bet would be fishing rights and Gibraltar would move back centre stage. Are the UK willing to move on them? What about NI, forget the backstop and simply leave NI within the EU?

If you look at all of the Brexiteers calling for renegotiation, none of them actually lay out what they will offer in return. And that has been the core problem throughout. The has never come to terms that they will not, ever, get everything they want and need to offer something to get something in return.

There is a case going on right now in the ECJ on the revocability of A50. The UK side has said it has no position. The EU side has said it should be for a very good reason. It may end up somewhere between a unilateral and anonymous revocation necessary.

The UK has not rejected a no-deal. No-deal is what happens by default if nothing else is agreed.

The EU has said they will not renegotiate. They should be taken at their word. There will not be another negotiation to fix May's political problems. The deal is signed and the game playing is over.

The full permutations as I see them are:

Leave:

• May's deal accepted by Commons
• May's deal accepted in Referendum
• No Deal default Leave
• Another off the shelf position requiring almost no negotiation: Norway+ is the only option to avoid backstop. So Norway + Customs Union.

Remain:

• Remain chosen in Referendum
• A50 revoked to avoid no-deal disaster

I reckon the 4 bolded options are most likely.

Professor Moriarty

The LSE, King's College and the Institute for Fiscal Studies have published a joint report. According to their research, May's deal will cost Britain anywhere between 1.9-5.5% of GDP. So it will be an economic negative. No deal brings it up to 3.5-8.7%. So much for the Utopia envisaged by the Brexiteers. A more important observation is that Ireland would suffer similar reductions in GDP whereas it will have relatively negligible impact on other EU countries. So they are making an economic mistake and will damage us severely in the process. Which is yet another reason why I detest Mogg, Johnson, Farage and their ilk.

Water John

The Guardian is putting it as 227 For and 412 Against the Deal. They have 93 Cons voting against.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/nov/26/how-will-your-mp-vote-on-theresa-mays-brexit-deal