Brexit discussion thread V - No Pic/GIF dumps please

Bit cynical

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?

It does. Formerly, I think, many of us here might have considered an extension to the negotiating period as something that the UK (not the EU) might be seeking. If there were to be an extension to A50, this would be something that the UK would have to ask for and the EU would attach conditions to its extension.

Now it is the EU asking for the extension and the UK is attaching conditions.

What we don't know is what is happening behind the scenes, in particular the role of Ireland in all this.

Capt'n Midnight

flatty wrote: »

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

MP's are arguing whether they can amend the deal and sent the negotiators back out again ?

Brexit: Row erupts over Commons 'meaningful vote'

Commons leader Andrea Leadsom insisted MPs would get the final say on whether the motion can be amended, but she urged them to "consider the question that will, in reality, be before the United Kingdom and that is whether or not to accept the deal that the government has negotiated with the European Union".

An Ciarraioch

May appears to have assured Varadkar that the backstop "would not be temporary", which would seem significant progress:

https://www.rte.ie/news/brexit/2018/1018/1004960-brexit/

Nody

Capt'n Midnight wrote: »

MP's are arguing whether they can amend the deal and sent the negotiators back out again ?

Brexit: Row erupts over Commons 'meaningful vote'

Read that one earlier shaking my head; sure, this deal negotiated with EU and are going through 30 odd locations for ratification is open for the UK parlament to modify as they see fit and expect the other 30 odd locations to simply nod and agree. What could possible be wrong in that idea...

J Mysterio

Water John wrote: »

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

Strange analogy, but ill take it :pac:

sink

If the Withdrawal Agreement only requires QMV and not unanimity, what happens if one of the EU27 parliaments reject it?

Professor Moriarty

An Ciarraioch wrote: »

May appears to have assured Varadkar that the backstop "would not be temporary", which would seem significant progress:

https://www.rte.ie/news/brexit/2018/1018/1004960-brexit/

If that's proven to be the case then I expect 48 letters would be immediately sent to the Chairman of the 1922 committee.

Leroy42

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

If that's proven to be the case then I expect 48 letters would be immediately sent to the Chairman of the 1922 committee.

If Tony is correct that I would raise serious questions about the people who leaked it. Have they leaned nothing from the December agreement mess.

Putting out these stories makes no sense before anything is fully signed and delivered

(this is on the basis that a non UK person leaked it)

seenitall

Most of Donegal seems to be going to the UK, according to the cover of the Spectator this week... Varadkar doesn't really look like himself either!

This is what the British public are fed.

https://mobile.twitter.com/spectator/status/1052546673711435776

Leroy42

I think it is meant to Macron

First Up

Bit cynical wrote:

Now it is the EU asking for the extension and the UK is attaching conditions.

I would be fascinated to see your justification for this bizarre conclusion.

Rhineshark

seenitall wrote: »

Most of Donegal seems to be going to the UK, according to the cover of the Spectator this week... Varadkar doesn't really look like himself either!

This is what the British public are fed.

https://mobile.twitter.com/spectator/status/1052546673711435776

It is really very hard to take the "control of our borders!" and "sovereignity!" talk remotely seriously when a) they don't want to do anything about the border to the UK itself and b) they sincerely do not seem to know where their own border is.

barry181091

https://twitter.com/DarrenEuronews/status/1052903483978989569

Leroy42

A UK wide backstop, isn't that just basically the UK staying in the CU? I thought the UK didn't want that as it requires common standards and ECJ oversight?

lawred2

Why don't they just stay in the bloody EU ffs

There is nothing whatsoever being gained by the UK in all this.

An Ciarraioch

Leroy42 wrote: »

A UK wide backstop, isn't that just basically the UK staying in the CU? I thought the UK didn't want that as it requires common standards and ECJ oversight?

And the SM also, if there's to be no regulatory divergence ...

Hurrache

The Apple challenge is apparently being dropped. Watch Brexiteers claims it's a bribe or payoff to the Irish government.

Call me Al

Leroy42 wrote: »

A UK wide backstop, isn't that just basically the UK staying in the CU? I thought the UK didn't want that as it requires common standards and ECJ oversight?

Yes. They're going around in circles.
At this rate I can't see how TM can get a parliamentary majority through for anything that will be offered to her without Labour help, so I think she's likely changed tack in the hope that some kind of united soft-Brexit position will be attractive enough to like-minded Labour Mps. She must think she can get the numbers?
I wonder what price will be extracted by them if she is successful in avoiding an election.

lawred2

Hurrache wrote: »

The Apple challenge is apparently being dropped. Watch Brexiteers claims it's a bribe or payoff to the Irish government.

No winners in that but Apple shareholders if that's the case.

Another 13Bn to add to the pile

LeinsterDub

Leroy42 wrote: »

A UK wide backstop, isn't that just basically the UK staying in the CU? I thought the UK didn't want that as it requires common standards and ECJ oversight?

Yes we are back to BINO which has been rejected by the ERG . But this maybe acceptable to Labour

Hurrache

lawred2 wrote: »

No winners in that but Apple shareholders if that's the case.

Another 13Bn to add to the pile

It's the action for not collecting the bill, not that the bill had to be collected in the first place.

Imreoir2

lawred2 wrote: »

No winners in that but Apple shareholders if that's the case.

Another 13Bn to add to the pile

No, the challenge is by the Irish state saying they don't want the money. Dropping the case means Ireland gets the 13B. Of course, once we get it, there will be a long line of other countries wanting their share of it.

AlmightyCushion

lawred2 wrote: »

No winners in that but Apple shareholders if that's the case.

Another 13Bn to add to the pile

They still have to pay the fine (which they already have), the challenge was over the delay. Once the money was paid, it was always going to be dropped.

Hurrache

Imreoir2 wrote: »

No, the challenge is by the Irish state saying they don't want the money. Dropping the case means Ireland gets the 13B. Of course, once we get it, there will be a long line of other countries wanting their share of it.

Plus it's being challenged by both Apple and Ireland anyway.

barry181091

Nice little windfall if we see most of it!

Bob24

Call me Al wrote: »

The CTA refers to people, and we will most likely not enforce residency/citizenship checks.

However it's also pertinent to consider what will be happening elsewhere throughout the UK whilst we deal along our border with the fallout of a no-deal. If the Britush government think they can ignore our insignificant (in their eyes) border then the pincer grip of the ferries, airports, and import/export industry throughout the constituencies that actually elect them might soften their cough.

So yeah sorry, I was a bit too liberal with interchanging CTA and borderless ireland as the former is a key intreument to deliver the later.

Having said that, the point remains that on the first day of a no-deal Brexit the pressure would be on the Republic (and not on the UK) to be the first one to introduce border checks, as the EU would be telling us that as a common market member we can’t not check vehicles and people crossing our border and potentially importing goods into the single market.

And even going back to the CTA, it is very possible that some of our commitements as an EU member would lead us to be in breach with the CTA. For exemple if for whatever reason there was a decision to ban some British citizens from the EU even that that person has done nothing wrong in the UK or Ireland, could we not be in a situation whereby we have to prevent that British citizen from crossing our border, which would question our commitment to the free movement of people between the UK and Ireland?

So with a no-deal we could be in an ackward position whereby we are forced to chose between being the ones effectively ending borderless Ireland or breaking our EU commitments.

This is what I think is underestimated. As I mentioned before the Republic of Ireland is essentially planning to remain in two international agreements (one with the EU, another with the UK) which might become mutually exclusive.

We can’t behave as if this potential contradiction has nothing to do with us and it is all the fault or the UK or the EU (both have their own legitimate reasons not to be wishing to compromise, on the territorial unity of the UK, and the integrity of the single market).

We can keep going with the current wishful thinking that the EU will necessarily defend our interest when things go wild and the UK will eventually change its policy, and if we are lucky it might happen.

But it’s far from guaranteed and we have to wonder if we are ok with a potential outcome whereby we are forced by the EU and the UK (none being on our side or against us, and each just defending their interest) to take our responsability and be the ones to choose between reintroducing a border or breaching the the single market. And if we are not ready for that choice, aren’t we sleepwalking into it with the current direction things are heading?

Professor Moriarty

Leroy42 wrote: »

If Tony is correct that I would raise serious questions about the people who leaked it. Have they leaned nothing from the December agreement mess.

Putting out these stories makes no sense before anything is fully signed and delivered

(this is on the basis that a non UK person leaked it)

It's fascinating to read all the different bits of 'information' being leaked by the various parties. Brexiteers, Remainers, UK government, Labour, DUP, Irish government, Barnier, Juncker etc. Plus there are 26 other governments who have skin in the game. And then there's the disparity in reportage in the British press. You could read the Guardian and the Telegraph on the same day and think they were talking about a different planet never mind a different country.

Daily Telegraph (majority of article behind paywall) getting outraged now about people going out and actually enjoying themselves it seems. I've had delicious Trappist beer at that place myself.......

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2018/10/18/merkel-macron-spent-time-pub-listening-mays-brexit-overtures/

Water John

Crisp is only continuing the good tradition of EU reporting, instigated by Johnson.

Akrasia

Leroy42 wrote: »

A UK wide backstop, isn't that just basically the UK staying in the CU? I thought the UK didn't want that as it requires common standards and ECJ oversight?

Well the backstop for NI requres not just CU membership, but adoption of any SM standards that are required to avoid checks at the border.

This would mean the UK would stay in both the single market and the Customs union, so yeah, Brexit in name only apart from the UK losing all influence over internal EU affairs.