Brexit Discussion Thread VI

lawred2

nice_guy80 wrote: »

Hopefully if there is a GE then the DUP will get mauled

Unlikely. Tribal politics forgives all sorts.

Enzokk

Tell me how wrote: »

Back to Brexit.

A tweet in the middle of a thread from BBC european Correspondent Katya Adler.

https://twitter.com/BBCkatyaadler/status/1083664901581737984

Tweet #8

She has issued some form of clarification as there was quite a reaction to her wording but it seemed incredibly poorly phrased either intentionally or lazily.

It is possible that her thoughts got lost in the 280 characters she has to try and articulate it, but her response seems clumsy as well so it makes me think her thought is not that well thought out.

lawred2 wrote: »

What was the the 'clarification'?

This was her clarification,

https://twitter.com/BBCkatyaadler/status/1083674416838598656

"Tweet provoked lots of reaction so let me clarify: Was NOT saying LV wants to back away from backstop. I realise too he has cross party support on Brexit but was hypothesising he’d lose support he needs IF backed away from backstop as gov relies on confidence + supply agreement"


So I guess what she was trying to say was that Varadkar would lose support if he waters down the backstop. There is no intention to do that but if he did then he would be weak. It is shoddy journalism from the BBC once again and only she knows whether she made an honest mistake on her tweet or that is her personal feeling of the situation Varadkar finds himself in.

Hurrache

lawred2 wrote: »

What was the the 'clarification'?

As well as the above she also said this

https://twitter.com/BBCkatyaadler/status/1083693104480309248?s=19

hometruths

DOCARCH wrote: »

If the intention was that....i.e. kicking down the road or there was an inkling UK might trigger A50 again in the near future....the EU may not accept revocation!

Probably into very sticky territory, but revocation has to be in 'good faith'.

Hard to know how that might pan out, as it has never happened before!

My understanding of the legal ruling was that the UK could unilaterally revoke it. i.e that does not need permission or acceptance from the EU?

In any case the EU is well versed in the politics of kicking the can down the road, I suspect they'd go for it if their acceptance was required.

Anthracite

Deleted User wrote: »

I'm not from the north, no, but I am from Ulster. We live in Asia and his girlfriend is Asian, and even she was a bit confused by what he said so she asked my girlfriend.

It was pretty odd.

Assuming he was Anglo-Saxon, you should have asserted that he was really a German, but called himself 'English'.

lawred2

schmittel wrote: »

My understanding of the legal ruling was that the UK could unilaterally revoke it. i.e that does not need permission or acceptance from the EU?

In any case the EU is well versed in the politics of kicking the can down the road, I suspect they'd go for it if their acceptance was required.

They could revoke it for sure but imagine the next round of A50 withdrawal negotiations

Presuming they went again of course

RobMc59

Anthracite wrote: »

Assuming he was Anglo-Saxon, you should have asserted that he was really a German, but called himself 'English'.

Would that qualify for duel nationality:)

Capt'n Midnight

nice_guy80 wrote: »

Hopefully if there is a GE then the DUP will get mauled

The DUP MP's will survive thanks to some recent Gerrymandering. Silvia Harmon is probably the Unionist that's most likely to lose her seat. She is also the only Remain MP from NI that votes in Westminster.

Katya should explain to her readers about the three biggest parties down here
- accepted partition as a first step
- fought a civil war over accepting partition
- still fighting over partition



And yes the Tories will try and shaft the DUP the first chance they get, and they won't care about collateral damage.

Sam Russell

Capt'n Midnight wrote: »

And yes the Tories will try and shaft the DUP the first chance they get, and they won't care about collateral damage.

Of course, it is TM's gift to call assembly elections in NI. Now that might be a threat to the DUP that might be enough to get them onside. She could also stop the pay of the assembly members.

Dyr

nice_guy80 wrote: »

Hopefully if there is a GE then the DUP will get mauled

And let themun's on the other side win?

Not happening

Imreoir2

Anthracite wrote: »

I don't think so - lots of countries produce whiskey and Scotch is still the top of the pile.

They don't really have any protected 'brands' to lose.

True, the problem being that should they lose the protected geographic indicater, then a company in China or anywhere can produce whiskey and sell it in the EU market branded as "Scotch". How many consumers will know or care about the difference between the real thing and a cheaper knock off?

Akrasia

DOCARCH wrote: »

If the intention was that....i.e. kicking down the road or there was an inkling UK might trigger A50 again in the near future....the EU may not accept revocation!

Probably into very sticky territory, but revocation has to be in 'good faith'.

Hard to know how that might pan out, as it has never happened before!

I think the EU will accept the withdrawal of A50. I'm not sure they can legally reject the withdrawal, but if its invoked again in the medium term, there won't be the same 2 year period to negotiate a WA, they'll be given the same deal they have now and told tbey have 3 months to ratify it or crash out

RobMc59

Imreoir2 wrote: »

True, the problem being that should they lose the protected geographic indicater, then a company in China or anywhere can produce whiskey and sell it in the EU market branded as "Scotch". How many consumers will know or care about the difference between the real thing and a cheaper knock off?

I disagree,whiskey is already produced in many countries but there will always be a strong market for Scottish whiskey-it's an image thing-especially with the US

FrancieBrady

RobMc59 wrote: »

I disagree,whiskey is already produced in many countries but there will always be a strong market for Scottish whiskey-it's an image thing-especially with the US

The big Scotch distilleries might opt to source their whisky in China and just rebottle it. Cheaper and the bottom line and all that. Only very informed consumers would notice. Same goes for chicken and beef.

ArmaniJeanss

RobMc59 wrote: »

I disagree,whiskey is already produced in many countries but there will always be a strong market for Scottish whiskey-it's an image thing-especially with the US

The point being that postBrexit there may be nothing to prevent me labelling the brand I produce in my garden as 'Scotch'. Which reduces the protection of the brand and long term reduces the cachet of 'Scotch' (because my stuff is vile frankly).

RobMc59

Capt'n Midnight wrote: »

The DUP MP's will survive thanks to some recent Gerrymandering. Silvia Harmon is probably the Unionist that's most likely to lose her seat. She is also the only Remain MP from NI that votes in Westminster.

Katya should explain to her readers about the three biggest parties down here
- accepted partition as a first step
- fought a civil war over accepting partition
- still fighting over partition



And yes the Tories will try and shaft the DUP the first chance they get, and they won't care about collateral damage.

According to Taoiseach Varadkar there's been a few slipped balaclavas but I can't seen anybody fighting over partition-he really is a steadying voice and has enhanced Ireland's prestige imo.
Sterling has rocketed to its highest in 2 months which will is a welcome development but next week may be a milestone one way or another.

Imreoir2

RobMc59 wrote: »

I disagree,whiskey is already produced in many countries but there will always be a strong market for Scottish whiskey-it's an image thing-especially with the US

Sure it is, but without the geographic protection anyone anywhere can produce whiskey and label it as "Scottish Whiskey". The fine print may say "Made in India", but how many people will look at the fine print? That is the point of having a protected geographic indicater in the first place.

Bit cynical

Imreoir2 wrote: »

Sure it is, but without the geographic protection anyone anywhere can produce whiskey and label it as "Scottish Whiskey". The fine print may say "Made in India", but how many people will look at the fine print? That is the point of having a protected geographic indicater in the first place.

I think if it was a worry, however, you would have started to see this in the US and Japan already where such protections have never applied.

India produces Bagpiper whisky which features a tartan kilted Indian soldier playing the bagpipes on the label giving it a Scottish theme. I don't think though that it has a huge following outside of India.


For myself, I'll stick with good Irish Whiskey!

unit 1

Well hopefully it will pan out as follows.

1 TM loses wa deal vote by a signifigant margin, case for wa closed.

2 She puts a motion to the hoc to confirm no deal dropping out of eu in march and this fails by a large margin (this will be useful as it will flush out the hardline brexiteers)

3 Although she lost 2 its still the default position (there has to be one), and can only be prevented IN THE NATIONAL INTEREST by a further vote to revoke article 50.
I surmise this might pass by a large enough margin to basically marginalise the brexiteers from no 2 above, by cross party support, and everyones a winner.
TM has saved the uk from disaster, and labour have saved the uk from disaster too, all caused by the nasty tories of course.
By summer brexit will be forgotten about and the fears about splitting the country by not doning brexit will evaporate. As an aside should a hard brexit actually happen I believe the econonic upheavel would make it far more devisive afterwards than a no brexit scenario.

edit
I'm assuming the above would be due to an open vote, without the whip if that in possible in the HoC

Bit cynical

unit 1 wrote: »

Well hopefully it will pan out as follows.

1 TM loses wa deal vote by a signifigant margin, case for wa closed.

It should be noted however that Ireland's stated hope, as articulated by Varadkar, is that the withdrawal agreement does pass scrutiny in the House of Commons.

2 She puts a motion to the hoc to confirm no deal dropping out of eu in march and this fails by a large margin (this will be useful as it will flush out the hardline brexiteers)

I don't think there has to be any agreement in the HoC in order for the UK to drop out of the EU. Article 50 has been invoked and, if nothing happens, then the UK drops out by default at the end of the two year period. Hence Ireland's stated hope that the deal will be passed.

I think that if the deal is not passed, then Ireland will reiterate its willingness to consider an extension to A50.

CelticRambler

unit 1 wrote: »

... a further vote to revoke article 50.

TM has saved the uk from disaster, and labour have saved the uk from disaster too, all caused by the nasty tories of course.

As an aside should a hard brexit actually happen I believe the econonic upheavel would make it far more devisive afterwards than a no brexit scenario.

As a political strategy, that would be very clever of Theresa May - call Labour's bluff (particularly Jeremy Corbyn's) on Brexit, and hang on to her desk in No.10 until the next election whenever that might be. A victory for the Tories in the face of certain defeat, and - if she can push that next GE to the limit - the prospect of an economic bounce for Britain in the run up to the vote granting the Tories yet another undeserved term in power. In such circumstances, the consequences for the Labour party would be horrendous ... :eek:

But with her record of always making the worst possible strategic decision, I doubt it'll play out like that! :pac:

Water John

When TM Brexit is defeated it triggers her 3 days to put an alternative. This, despite what No 10 are trying to do, nobbling that, Bercow nor the HOC will allow amendments and full debate. It is clearly in the country's interest that such would be allowed. Also, she may be heavily defeated, mortally wounding her status and power.
This may produce some sort of package that a majority in the House agree on. All the time the Lb motion of no confidence is ready to be triggered. BTW that would be defeated, but it would be out of the way and Lb would then clearly have to move on.

Thargor

Water John wrote: »

When TM Brexit is defeated it triggers her 3 days to put an alternative. This, despite what No 10 are trying to do, nobbling that, Bercow nor the HOC will allow amendments and full debate. It is clearly in the country's interest that such would be allowed. Also, she may be heavily defeated, mortally wounding her status and power.
This may produce some sort of package that a majority in the House agree on. All the time the Lb motion of no confidence is ready to be triggered. BTW that would be defeated, but it would be out of the way and Lb would then clearly have to move on.

Easily wriggled out of, they could just say they plan to arrange further meetings with the EU.

johnnyskeleton

schmittel wrote: »

I'll give it a shot.

1) TM loses the vote on the WA by over 100. House of Commons in uproar, majority against the WA, but no majority for any alternative.

2) EU issues some platitudes about the intention that the backstop is only temporary but it is not enough to win the hardline DUP/ERG etc.

3) MPs agree that leaving on No Deal terms is not an option so the only way forward is to ask the EU 27 for an extension to Article 50, to allow UK to get their house in order.

4) At least one of the EU27 says no extension. We're fed up with this nonsense, if you want to leave, then leave. Take the WA or No Deal, but just get it over with. A decision to grant to extension has to be unanimous so the answer from EU is no extension.

5) MPs realise they have backed themselves into a corner. Having ruled out the WA and No Deal, with no extension the only way to stop the clock and avoid No Deal is to revoke Article 50.

6) A group of cross party pragmatic MPs propose to revoke Article 50 in the national interest to avoid No Deal. A lot of bluster about the threat to democracy etc but revoking is spun as a temporary measure to allow Parliament to agree on the best way to leave the EU etc, they can trigger Article 50 again in the future etc.

7) They revoke Article 50, and the can is kicked down the road. Indefinitely.

The above is obviously going to take more than 10 days to unfold, but ultimately this is how I think it will play out

I would agree with you up to point 5), but the UK tactic at the moment is to hold a gun to their own head and say that unless the EU negotiates less well, they will shoot themselves in the head. So the EU say "right that's it, no extensions, no amendments, take it or leave it", then the parliament will continue right up to about 10pm on the 29th March with no deal preparations on the one hand and the deal on the other and have another vote about it.

The only way to get the parliament to vote for the deal is to leave it to the last minute. However, the Tory backbenchers are likely to be extremely obsinate and I don't see it passing then either. Maybe some Labour voters who are currently against the deal with vote for it at the last minute, but that's a big "maybe"

So basically, they will keep going on deal or no deal until the 29th March and it's a genuine toss up as to whether they will do what is in the national interest and lose face, or opt to save face and force the no deal Brexit. My money is now on the latter, having up until last month been convinced a deal would go through!

Nody

johnnyskeleton wrote: »

So basically, they will keep going on deal or no deal until the 29th March and it's a genuine toss up as to whether they will do what is in the national interest and lose face, or opt to save face and force the no deal Brexit. My money is now on the latter, having up until last month been convinced a deal would go through!

Welcome to the dark side my son :P

I overall agree with you though; I'm sure EU will offer "something" once the vote fails to give UK a "win" but what ever that is I'm sure it's not going to be enough. Why? Because they seriously expect EU to give them everything last minute and they are exactly that deluded and will think if they wait there will be more cake until it's to late. Once they crash out it will be under a fanfare of "it's all EU's fault" along with "stiff upper lip; we're British and can handle this" while Labour start a motion of confidence challenge at the most inconvenient time possible causing further disruption. Funny thing is I expect May to call a GE if she thinks she'll lose it simply because it allows her a chance to remain PM for another month or two at least.

Scoondal

I find it strange that Sterling strengthened by over 1% on Friday. And that there was no Brexit news and very few Brexit utterances from UK MPs. Yet, at EU level according to RTE's Tony Connelly there is nothing happening on the EU side apart from continuing to allow UK politics sort out a domestic problem.
Article 50 can only be extended in exceptional circumstances, such as a general election or a new UK referendum on EU membership. Mrs. May would love to kick the can down the road again but brexiteers want out on 29 March.
An extension will only bring out the extremists of brexit.
An EEA option will never be allowed by UK citizens.
Ditching the NI backstop will be rejected by EU.
Mrs May has reached the end of her policy of delaying with nothing substantive to offer. It's time for EU to tell her to just go away and stop wasting our time.

trellheim

The EU has other things on its mind right now, budget , elections and the real world. The sight if the UK picking a fight with itself in a mirror is only watchable for so long. If it was - say - Cyprus - leaving, our interest would be far less, unfortunately its next door

Water John

TM can waffle any nonsense she likes as her Plan B, it's the amendments, which BTW are voted on prior to her Plan B, which dictate what the UK does.
One of the amendments is likely to rule out a No Deal Brexit and that would pass.
Don't see the Executive going against the wishes of the HoC. That indeed would be a full constitutional crisis.

Spanish Eyes

trellheim wrote: »

The EU has other things on its mind right now, budget , elections and the real world. The sight if the UK picking a fight with itself in a mirror is only watchable for so long. If it was - say - Cyprus - leaving, our interest would be far less, unfortunately its next door

This is very true.

But the backstop and the GFA are at stake here along with many other issues for ROI and as you say those issues are far from the minds of many of the other 27 now.

But we must keep the pressure up, primarily because UK does not seem to know what it wants, but expects everyone else to sort it out for them.

Difficult days ahead, but with my optimistic hat on, hopefully even though it is down to the wire now, things may just be sorted for everyone involved. There will have to be compromise though.

I don't think a NO DEAL is on the cards, so the issue is.... what is on the cards?

Water John

Hopefully the HOC specifically rules out a Crash Out Brexit.