Brexit Discussion Thread VI

Enzokk

J Mysterio wrote: »

Nissan basically told its employees that Brexit could make operations in Sunderland difficult for them. They were like turkeys voting for christmas. And they still raced to announce the result so they could beat Newcastle. Ridiculous.

Well in fairness if Nissan employs 8000 people directly in Sunderland and a further 30 000 indirectly you have about 38 000 jobs relying on Nissan. The number of people that voted remain was almost 52 000 so in theory you could have had all of those people voting for remain.

I have no doubt that some people reliant on Nissan would have voted to leave but it could also be a case that all those that are directly employed voted to remain and it didn't make one bit of difference. I wonder how big the crab mentality played a part where people were happy to see their neighbours suffer financially because they have seen them move up on the economical ladder whereas they are stuck behind.

Also, not sure if this has been posted but it is a couple of days old,

Rolls-Royce to stockpile parts in case of hard Brexit

British aerospace firm Rolls-Royce is pressing ahead with plans to stockpile parts and move some regulatory approvals to Germany as it prepares for a possible hard Brexit.

Rolls-Royce on Wednesday said it is in talks with the European Aviation Safety Agency to transfer design regulatory approvals for large jet engines away from the UK. The company already deals with German regulators for business jet components.

Aerospace manufacturers in the UK face the prospect of their regulatory permissions on safety standards being invalidated in EU countries if there is no Brexit deal.

Rolls-Royce said the transfer was a “precautionary and reversible technical action”, and added that no jobs are expected to move as a result.

RobMc59

fash wrote: »

Firstly, so what. Worst case scenario, the UK doesn't agree, falls of the EU and eventually comes back looking for some form of deal - likely within months.
At that point of time, Ireland can soften its stance if it really needs to - which is unlikely as a crash out will mean a change in UK government and likely a government with a strong mandate.
So what if we take a temporary economic hit -
Some things are more important than economics - if it has taught us anything, brexit should have taught us that.


Don't forget that Theresa May and all of the UK government signed off on stage 1 of the WA discussions and were happy with it and this followed months of guarantees to the same effect that no border would be allowed - it was only afterwards that they changed their minds. Aside from anything else, why should we show them to back out of the "political" commitment?

I think you are wrong about the EU insofar as I think that insofar as the UK says no border, Ireland says no border, the EU won't be the first to move to say "ha, ha - border". Only if the UK openly said "actually we need a border", and Ireland said "that's ok" would the EU move forward on that basis. But the time for that discussion was during phase 1 of the WA process- not now when the WA is drafted.
Instead what the border issue is to the EU is and was was the rock of reality upon which the delusions of Brexit would crack open in one direction or another. At that point, the UK chose "no border" (or more correctly preferred to keep the delusion afloat a little longer and the nearest rock was the border issue due to sequencing by Ireland and the EU).

However you rearrange the words,it`s detrimental and against the interests of Ireland and the UK to have any kind of hard/semi hard border .

Strazdas

judeboy101 wrote: »

Cabinet reportedly split between
Norway plus, referendum and no deal.

Crazy stuff. Two and a half years after the referendum and they can't even remotely agree on a position or even narrow it down to two choices.

Capt'n Midnight

Christy42 wrote: »

Finally the open border is a pretty big part of the lack of violence. British troops on the border will not be taken well and they couldn't police it the last time.

27,000 troops and 40% of the vehicle fuel was still smuggled or laundered.

That's a huge wage bill and a huge revenue loss. Now add in cigarettes and the carbon tax on coal. It could easily reach a billion a year. The men of violence would jump for a slice of that.

A Hard Brexit will make extradition difficult. It used to be embarrassing that the UK didn't do the paperwork properly.

Deploying 27,00 troops to NI would leave the UK with 50,000 at home and elsewhere abroad.

briany

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

The BBC news has reported that while Britons will not have to apply for visas to visit EU countries, they will have to apply for a €7 ETIAS document which allows for infinite entries and exits within a 3-year period for short stays.

Story here:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-46564884

So, boozy flights to Malaga just got 7 euros dearer for each British passport holder?

LuckyLloyd

Bit cynical wrote: »

Although the member states will go along with the current May deal, they would be reasonably happy with a comprehensive trade deal if it is also acceptable to Ireland. My view is that it is primarily the EU leadership which is using Ireland and the backstop as a means of forcing the UK to choose between no deal on the one hand or humiliation on the other with Ireland taking the hit in the case of no deal.

The intention remains to negotiate a comprehensive Free Trade arrangement between the EU and Britain. The reality that Brexiteers blithely skate over is how long that might take - as much as a decade to work out all the complexities and nuances, particularly given it will be an arrangement more ambitious than any that has preceded it.

The conflation of that with the WA is classic Brexiteer rhetoric (not that I am accusing you of being a Brexiteer), for the two phases have been completely separated out in terms of process. If the UK wanted to disagree or fight that separation / sequencing the time has long been and gone. In that regard, the sorting of the Irish border as a pre requisite to moving onto other items is very much an Irish ask, not a EU driver as you may suggest.

You have articulated your view well across your posts on this topic. I just don't personally agree with it. The Irish diplomatic core set to work pushing the Irish border as a key EU point of negotiation within the hours and days following the referendum result. The EU response letter in March of last year to the formal triggering of Article 50 was a clear demonstration of a negotiating position borne of collective input favouring the concerns of states most acutely affected by the British decision to leave. If there is a wedge developing between Ireland and the EU, it is in my view a hardening of the majority of the 27 to Britain's nonsense and political calamity. In the final moment, it seems more likely to me that Varadkar would blink than Juncker / Barnier / Merkel / Macron / the EU Parliament. At a certain point, there is only so many empty presentations you can sit through from May. Only so many deltas between what a Brexit Minister says in Brussels on a Saturday and says to Marr on a Sunday before you decide '**** those guys'.

The result or ultimate outcome of that may arguably be similar to your view of events, but the nuance of the drivers *is* important. As is the way in which a Hard Border becomes a necessity. Because it all comes down to - in my view - the importance of sticking to your principles and not pandering to the frankly crazy and irresponsible politics ripping the UK asunder. No more short term salves or fixes. The future of the EU - and almost by extension the future of rational politics in Europe - depends upon it.

Capt'n Midnight

judeboy101 wrote: »

Cabinet reportedly split between
Norway plus, referendum and no deal.

What about Remain ?

And referendum means nothing because the questions are likely to be loaded.
"Would you like to be shot in the leg or in the head ?"


Norway+ is just insane for the UK.

Norway means taking most EU rules, the Four Freedoms and Schengen, a hard border, and abandoning passporting for the service industry.

And they'd get to pay the EU as much as they do now.
Possibly more if they loose the rebate, other opt-outs, and EU only contracts.


Norway + + + maybe, but isn't being offered. The EU isn't going destroy relationships with Norway and Switzerland and other possible accession countries on the off chance appeasement might work.

LuckyLloyd

Deleted User wrote: »

Watching Blair talk about Brexit there.. That man is tarnished by Iraq, but there is a pragmatism in Blair and Major that is totally lacking in British politics nowadays. Maybe it's their position now that allows them to speak like this, but the UK really needs one, just politician who could be a PM who can lead.

When I watch the Commons, I see various faces who speak well and seem sensible. I don't understand the nuances enough to see how Boris could ever be above them politically.

Has it been too easy for the last 20 years? Those two men dealt with serious issues (perhaps badly) and it seems to have grounded them in reality.

I think you can track an awful lot of the effective splintering of societal discourse back to the Internet, or more specifically social media. The unintended consequences have been truly massive. There is also the reality that Globalism by its very nature has discommoded white "working class" people in the West as there is a surge of prosperity in the developing world. Blair, Major, Clinton et al were rational individuals who still made key mistakes and oversaw policies that made people poorer or brought them out to unnecessary wars to die on premises proven to be false. Unfortunately the conversation on those errors has been largely had in social media bubbles, open to manipulation and rife with hate. When we most needed the fourth estate, it was in absolute crisis.

So here we are. Brexit, Trump and the rise of the politics of anger once again across the West. As the Chinese curse says, may you live in interesting times.

judeboy101

Capt'n Midnight wrote: »

What about Remain ?

And referendum means nothing because the questions are likely to be loaded.
"Would you like to be shot in the leg or in the head ?"


Norway+ is just insane for the UK.

Norway means taking most EU rules, the Four Freedoms and Schengen, a hard border, and abandoning passporting for the service industry.

And they'd get to pay the EU as much as they do now.
Possibly more if they loose the rebate, other opt-outs, and EU only contracts.


Norway + + + maybe, but isn't being offered. The EU isn't going destroy relationships with Norway and Switzerland and other possible accession countries on the off chance appeasement might work.

The remainers are the referendum crew.

fergiesfolly

No matter what happens, you'd have to believe that the UKs relationship with it's closest EU neighbours is damaged irrevocably.
Their politicians, helped by their media have spewed vile accusations, lied to their own people and made all sorts of derogatory remarks about their neighbours.
Even if the final outcome is Remain, what EU leaders or negotiators will want to sit round a table with their UK counterparts.

fash

Capt'n Midnight wrote: »

What about Remain ?

And referendum means nothing because the questions are likely to be loaded.
"Would you like to be shot in the leg or in the head ?"


Norway+ is just insane for the UK.

Norway means taking most EU rules, the Four Freedoms and Schengen, a hard border, and abandoning passporting for the service industry.

And they'd get to pay the EU as much as they do now.
Possibly more if they loose the rebate, other opt-outs, and EU only contracts.


Norway + + + maybe, but isn't being offered. The EU isn't going destroy relationships with Norway and Switzerland and other possible accession countries on the off chance appeasement might work.

In any case, any "Norway" type option is a "post WA" discussion- and not incompatible with signing the WA.

Leroy42

The likes of Davis and IDS keep banging about a FTA yet I have never heard them explain that any such agreement necessitaes the agreeing of standards.

Thus 'taking back control ' doesn't exist.

But they haven't even begun to have that conversation in the UK. Thus, similar to the backstop, when the FTA is actually negotiated you will have a wave of uprising about how the PM could sell out the UK.

Thus, having a backstop is completely necessary as clearly the UK are not actually ready for any comprehensive deal.

CelticRambler

briany wrote: »

So, boozy flights to Malaga just got 7 euros dearer for each British passport holder?

The monetary cost is a pittance, but (a) it will help to highlight the difference between purely British nationals and their European peers when travelling as a group; and (b) it's the kind of administrative process that is so trivial it'll be forgotten about until you present your Blue Passport at immigration.

I've already seen versions of both of these scenarios in action, specifically in respect of my children and their peers. In the first case, my (Irish passport holding) children were threatened with being excluded from school tours because French children had, at that time, to apply to the local prefect for permission to leave the territory. It took a lot of effort to explain to their teachers that the French prefect did not have the legal authority to authorise and Irish citizen to leave a foreign territory - but their passports fulfilled the same role (none of the French children had passports, only ID cards). Going back a bit further, when my children were in school in the UK, they had almost no British friends. Imagine a class of children going on a trip to France/Belgium/Germany: schools will have to send a note home to the parents of all pure-blooded British students telling them that they need a visa waiver; and then a footnote - "this requirement does not apply to European immigrants"

As for (b) - Several times, I've witnessed parents being denied permission to board a plane/train with a child because they don't have the right consent form. The worst was a mother with her own children, she travelling under her maiden name, they under their father's name, and their frantic calls to the father to try and get some kind of documentation to the border agent before the boarding gate closed. How many similar incidents are we likely to seen when Wayne and Tracey turn up in Malaga with an ETIAS that they applied for three years and two months ago, now expired (or more likely just Wayne, coz Tracey checked and renewed hers the week before ... :pac: )

Whatever happens at a heavyweight economic level, this is the kind of thing that will mark the travelling British as second-class citizens, and that'll hurt.

Strazdas

fergiesfolly wrote: »

No matter what happens, you'd have to believe that the UKs relationship with it's closest EU neighbours is damaged irrevocably.
Their politicians, helped by their media have spewed vile accusations, lied to their own people and made all sorts of derogatory remarks about their neighbours.
Even if the final outcome is Remain, what EU leaders or negotiators will want to sit round a table with their UK counterparts.

The situation is reparable I think but the current crowd would have to depart the scene and be seen to have left ie. the Tories, Farage, Kate Hoey and the rest. If they were still around, the situation would remain toxic.

Inquitus

3/1 now at the bookies for the UK to vote to remain in the EU in 2019.

briany

Inquitus wrote: »

3/1 now at the bookies for the UK to vote to remain in the EU in 2019.

Between the members of Labour and the Conservatives who insist on respecting the original vote, and the members of Labour who continue to insist that another GE is the answer, how is a majority of parliament expected to pass the legislation required for another referendum, and moreover how can they be expected to agree on the question it poses?

judeboy101

HoC would have to pass referendum legislation before EU agree to extension, else EU risk UK potentially not pass legislation in HoC.

murphaph

Enzokk wrote: »

Well in fairness if Nissan employs 8000 people directly in Sunderland and a further 30 000 indirectly you have about 38 000 jobs relying on Nissan. The number of people that voted remain was almost 52 000 so in theory you could have had all of those people voting for remain.

I have no doubt that some people reliant on Nissan would have voted to leave but it could also be a case that all those that are directly employed voted to remain and it didn't make one bit of difference. I wonder how big the crab mentality played a part where people were happy to see their neighbours suffer financially because they have seen them move up on the economical ladder whereas they are stuck behind.

Also, not sure if this has been posted but it is a couple of days old,

Rolls-Royce to stockpile parts in case of hard Brexit

Loads and loads of turkeys voted for Xmas. Funny you should mention RR. I did my German language proficiency test alongside 3 Brits (who really need citizenship security) all working for RR in Dalewitz near Berlin. They reckoned vast numbers of their Derby colleagues voted to leave. They couldn't fathom it any more than we can.

Water John

With TM getting SFA from the EU obviously, it's time for Lb to table their no confidence motion and get that out of the way, once she reports back to Parliament next week, when she'll be telling them another porkie.

Captain Obvious

This is a new level of ridiculous for a leave supporter.

https://inews.co.uk/culture/television/question-time-soldiers-died-second-referendum/

What soldiers is he talking about?

Leroy42

^his last bit sums everything up for me.

"What I mean is......" Shrug of the shoulders and simply opens his arms up.

Charles Babbage

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

I think you can track an awful lot of the effective splintering of societal discourse back to the Internet, or more specifically social media.

This is easy to say, but the British newspapers are resonsible for much of this, they've been spewing lies about the EU for 30 years and their reporting continues to lie.

tuxy

Water John wrote: »

With TM getting SFA from the EU obviously, it's time for Lb to table their no confidence motion and get that out of the way, once she reports back to Parliament next week, when she'll be telling them another porkie.

They don't have the backing for this to pass. The DUP are still on side. Torys who wanted to change leader last weak would still back her over Corbyn.
It would just cause further time wasting and arguments.
If they do it now they won't be able to take over when the real chaos starts so they will bide their time.

seamus

Leroy42 wrote: »

^his last bit sums everything up for me.

"What I mean is......" Shrug of the shoulders and simply opens his arms up.

"What I mean is, once a referendum has gone my way shouldn't we make it illegal to ever ask again in case it doesn't go my way next time?"

cml387

Just to say that everyone contributing to this thread should read Ivan Rodgers' speech,linked to by Captain Midnight in post 313.

It is a tour de force of clinical analysis of the lies,obfuscation and delusion that has taken place in Westminster for the past two years.

brickster69

Vehicles under the EU Flag on the streets to quell protesters in Paris.

https://newspunch.com/eu-army-deployed-paris-crush-french-revolution/

No French flag to see

Water John

I mean Lb should now table their vote and get it out of the way. Recognise it'll likely fail. But that will allow the process to move on, esp for Corbyn, 2nd Ref is next then.

lawred2

brickster69 wrote: »

Vehicles under the EU Flag on the streets to quell protesters in Paris.

https://newspunch.com/eu-army-deployed-paris-crush-french-revolution/

No French flag to see

Check out @CuAnnan’;s Tweet: https://twitter.com/CuAnnan/status/1072953567387009029?s=09

Not sure which tweet is accurate but one thing is for sure I wouldn't go near anything called 'newspunch' for news.

That article is brilliant really. One of its sources is the daily mail..

Podge_irl

lawred2 wrote: »

Not sure which tweet is accurate but one thing is for sure I wouldn't go near anything called 'newspunch' for news.

That article is brilliant really. One of its sources is the daily mail..

I think we can rule out the tweet talking about the EU army on the streets of Paris...

tuxy

Water John wrote: »

I mean Lb should now table their vote and get it out of the way. Recognise it'll likely fail. But that will allow the process to move on, esp for Corbyn, 2nd Ref is next then.

Does Corbyn want a second referendum? He keeps changing his mind and sounds luke warm about the idea at best. He may have some pressure from his party to support that position but I don't think he likes the idea.
His goal will be to see how much damage the tories can do to themselves then wait for the right time to twist the knife. It's not about what is best for the UK but what is best for labour.