Brexit discussion thread V - No Pic/GIF dumps please

briany

swampgas wrote: »

Interesting idea - but what if the ERG actually wants a no-deal Brexit? If JRM and others can profit from a hard Brexit then I wouldn't put it past them to try to make it happen. While pretending the opposite of course.

After an 'a la carte' Brexit, no-deal may be a fitting consolation for the ERG. Their position has been that they in no way want the UK to be 'trapped' by the EU's institutions.

It'll be some spectacle watching May convince the public to spend another 10bn to stay in the CU for a year.

Guardian has someone quoting Daily Mail for that.

Imreoir2

swampgas wrote: »

Interesting idea - but what if the ERG actually wants a no-deal Brexit? If JRM and others can profit from a hard Brexit then I wouldn't put it past them to try to make it happen. While pretending the opposite of course.

As far as I can see, very few members of the ERG actually want a no deal. They want a Free Trade Deal with the EU. Some of them may think that accepting a no-deal is a necessary step to getting to a Free Trade Deal as the EU will be forced to make lots of "no-deal deals" to mitigate the damage because the UK is such an important country that the damage to the EU would be far to great no to do such deals. With those mini deals in the bag, the UK could then take its time, get a Free Trade Deal with the EU, and with the rest of the world too, and then presumanbly build statues to their Brexiteer national heros once the Brexit dream has been realised.

Water John

'Five Conservative ex-cabinet ministers, including Boris Johnson and David Davis, have signed a letter to Theresa May urging her to reject both an Northern Ireland backstop and, crucially, an all-UK version. Johnson and Davis have signed it even though they were in cabinet when the government published its own plan for a UK-wide backstop.

The other three former cabinet ministers who have signed the letter are Priti Patel, Iain Duncan Smith, Owen Paterson. And Jacob Rees-Mogg, chair of the European Research Group of pro-Brexit Tory backbenchers, is also a signatory.'
Jessica Elgot, Guardian

So now two ministers at the time who agreed to the backstop, one of whom negotiated it, wanted it rejected. Two have ambitions to be PM and negotiate Brexit with the EU.

Inquitus

Gove for PM with a Norway for now supposedly, the reporting on Brexit is getting a bit like the Football Transfer stories before the season starts, make up anything and you can't go wrong!

https://twitter.com/Andrew_Adonis/status/1052817405951569921

LuckyLloyd

https://www.google.ie/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/politics/2015/oct/28/the-norway-option-what-is-it-and-what-does-it-mean-for-britain

Useful reminder of what the Norway option would entail.

flatty

Inquitus wrote: »

Gove for PM with a Norway for now supposedly, the reporting on Brexit is getting a bit like the Football Transfer stories before the season starts, make up anything and you can't go wrong!

https://twitter.com/Andrew_Adonis/status/1052817405951569921

Crikey, anything, but anything to prevent a democratic vote. You literally would struggle to make it up. It's GUBU.

Imreoir2

Water John wrote: »

'Five Conservative ex-cabinet ministers, including Boris Johnson and David Davis, have signed a letter to Theresa May urging her to reject both an Northern Ireland backstop and, crucially, an all-UK version. Johnson and Davis have signed it even though they were in cabinet when the government published its own plan for a UK-wide backstop.

The other three former cabinet ministers who have signed the letter are Priti Patel, Iain Duncan Smith, Owen Paterson. And Jacob Rees-Mogg, chair of the European Research Group of pro-Brexit Tory backbenchers, is also a signatory.'
Jessica Elgot, Guardian

So now two ministers at the time who agreed to the backstop, one of whom negotiated it, wanted it rejected. Two have ambitions to be PM and negotiate Brexit with the EU.

Might not be the worst thing, if the UK wide backstop becomes just as unacceptable to the hard Brexiteers then the issue moves away from one of the constitutional integrity of the UK. Easier for the Government to sign up to a backstop if the public perception of doing so is no longer entirely associated with dividing the UK.

Winters

Why are they still talking about "negotiations" when its now simply down to Theresa May choosing either SM&CU or backstop.

First Up

Winters wrote:

Why are they still talking about "negotiations" when its now simply down to Theresa May choosing either SM&CU or backstop.

The negotiations are in London.

Imreoir2

flatty wrote: »

Crikey, anything, but anything to prevent a democratic vote. You literally would struggle to make it up. It's GUBU.

I am not convinced a second referendum is the best option at this point. There is no certainty that remain would win. If they can't agree a deal and get it through Parliament, and go for a peoples vote to try to get themselves out of this mess, what happens if leave wins again? There wont be any deal, and you can be sure the Brexiteers will use another referendum win to push through the hardest possible Brexit, deal or no-deal.

Even if remain did win, and we get an eleventh hour halt, Brexit won't just go away. I worry that in such a scenario a last minute remain vote might become a temporary stay of execution leading to a worse outcome later, like Chamberlins bit of paper and "peace in our time" avoiding a small war with Germany only leading to a much worse war later.

Mc Love

Inquitus wrote: »

Gove for PM with a Norway for now supposedly, the reporting on Brexit is getting a bit like the Football Transfer stories before the season starts, make up anything and you can't go wrong!

https://twitter.com/Andrew_Adonis/status/1052817405951569921

https://twitter.com/ShelaghFogarty/status/1052866873761648642?s=20

ECO_Mental

Inquitus wrote: »

Gove for PM with a Norway for now supposedly, the reporting on Brexit is getting a bit like the Football Transfer stories before the season starts, make up anything and you can't go wrong!

https://twitter.com/Andrew_Adonis/status/1052817405951569921

The Brexiters wont have that...all the EU rules, still pay money to the EU, have border checks to slow down trade and then have no say on the rules that are imposed on them.....

barry181091

https://twitter.com/gordonrayner/status/1052879905690722304

This is absolutely bonkers. So they will accept extra time only if the EU accept their backstop proposal? What? How in gods name does that add up for the EU? Am I stupid?

Water John

That was my understanding of what the UK were offering last night, and extension but take out the whole backstop issue in UK's favour.
The UK Press then just went with the first part and ignored the second part. That then became the false narrative. No better lads to frame the narrative.
Absolute non runner from an EU POV.

Enzokk

barry181091 wrote: »

https://twitter.com/gordonrayner/status/1052879905690722304

This is absolutely bonkers. So they will accept extra time only if the EU accept their backstop proposal? What? How in gods name does that add up for the EU? Am I stupid?

I am also struggling to find the positives for the EU in an extended transition period that would make them give up their backstop. If anything it is better for the UK surely if they have more time to negotiate a deal with the EU and essentially being in the EU.

Leroy42

All this meetings and letters and hand wringing from Tories in pretty much an mdeia outlet you can think of shows just how little power TM actually has.

Everyone knew she was going to Brussels and, I assume, the cabinet at the least were aware of the plan and thus had gamed out the likely outcomes. She hasn't even finished the meetings and already we have calls for her to resign etc. It is completely untenable and the EU must know that May has no ability to agree to anything.

It is hardly surprising the reaction from the EU. That they have learnt from Salzburg and opted for the softly nicely approach rather than the truth shows that the EU are trying to help TM.

kuro68k

She is crazy. The EU rightly wants a proper backstop with no time limit, and she is offer a few months at most?!

Leroy42

barry181091 wrote: »

https://twitter.com/gordonrayner/status/1052879905690722304

This is absolutely bonkers. So they will accept extra time only if the EU accept their backstop proposal? What? How in gods name does that add up for the EU? Am I stupid?

Sounds like a load of rubbish. Why would TM not state this when she mentioned the extended transition period to the reporters this morning? Did it just slip her mind to tell everyone what she had got as a benefit.

Water John

Both things are UK saviours. Like saying I'll stop harming myself if you give me the cocaine.

First Up

kuro68k wrote:

She is crazy. The EU rightly wants a proper backstop with no time limit, and she is offer a few months at most?!

That's not what she offered. The few months are an extension to the transition period to buy more time for trade negotiations. Her line is still that the backstop won't be needed and she reportedly assured Varadkar last night that (if needed) the backstop will be permanent.

She is caught between reality and the delusions of the Brexiteers in her own cabinet and party. It doesn't cost the EU anything to give her more time to try to reconcile the two.

Professor Moriarty

The real danger is that a tipping point is reached by the EU where they begin to change their attitude and planning towards no deal. The momentum shift will harden minds further against the UK's prevarication and will make any possible compromise much more difficult.

Sam Russell

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

The real danger is that a tipping point is reached by the EU where they begin to change their attitude and planning towards no deal. The momentum shift will harden minds further against the UK's prevarication and will make any possible compromise much more difficult.

I think that point was past in June when the UK turned up with nothing to offer.

Extending the transition will be needed because negotiating a trade deal will take a decade.

Zubeneschamali

Sam Russell wrote: »

Extending the transition will be needed because negotiating a trade deal will take a decade.

Or perhaps no transition will be needed because they are going to go the full Mad Max.

Winters

First Up wrote: »

That's not what she offered. The few months are an extension to the transition period to buy more time for trade negotiations. Her line is still that the backstop won't be needed and she reportedly assured Varadkar last night that (if needed) the backstop will be permanent.

She is caught between reality and the delusions of the Brexiteers in her own cabinet and party. It doesn't cost the EU anything to give her more time to try to reconcile the two.

If her red lines stay the same then the backstop will definitely be required. I wish Barnier and Varadkar would stop tip toeing around that fact.

Leroy42

Winters wrote: »

If her red lines stay the same then the backstop will definitely be required. I wish Barnier and Varadkar would stop tip toeing around that fact.

My reading of it is that the EU know that TM sees the reality and, to a large degree accepts that the EU have all the cards.

But they also are aware that there is a significant amount of people within her own party on across the HoC can are still wedded to the fantasy, either through ignorance or not being able to accept that their dream doesn't exist.

They are therefore trying to help TM to carry this through, and know that TM is probably the only person within the Tories can even has a chance of doing that.

Just look at comments from the EU leaders yesterday. All positive, without saying anything really. I think they know that the reaction in Salzburg, whilst totally correct, led to significant increase on TM to become more hard line.

First Up

Winters wrote:

If her red lines stay the same then the backstop will definitely be required. I wish Barnier and Varadkar would stop tip toeing around that fact.

Tiptoeing? They have never been anything other than completely blunt about that.

May's (last?) throw of the dice is that she can get her own party to accept reality and agree to enough compliance with EU conditions to allow a Customs Union. That's the only way the backstop wouldn't be needed.

Giving her a few more months to bring the slow learners on board is reasonable; the UK political landscape is almost sure change in the meantime anyway.

Lemming

Mc Love wrote: »

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sounds/play/m0000qks Coveney on Radio4 this morning, from 2hr 10mins in, and things get heated from 2:18 onwards.

Anyone got a non-bbc link as it keeps trying to prompt me to sign up in order to listen to it?

Akrasia

They could at least point out the fact that it is a complete contradiction to say 'A backstop won't be needed because we'll have the a technical soluton implemented that won't need any infrastructure at the border"

And "We must have a time limit on the backstop"

The implementation of a satisfactory border arrangement is the time limit to the backstop. The brexiters are claiming they'll get that done quickly, in which case, they won't need a time limit. The EU are saying they're living in dream land and the backstop is needed to protect the peace in NI.

Any brexiter who says that their plan avoids the requirement of a hard border in Ireland should have absolutely no problem with accepting an open ended backstop.

Unless, of course, they are all a bunch of lying cretins who are trying to engineer a way for them to weasel out of all their commitments without any consideration for the lives it will cost when the NI peace process breaks down.

First Up

Akrasia wrote:

They could at least point out the fact that it is a complete contradiction to say 'A backstop won't be needed because we'll have the a technical soluton implemented that won't need any infrastructure at the border"


And "We must have a time limit on the backstop"

They are.