Brexit Discussion Thread VI

Zubeneschamali

Peregrinus wrote: »

(b) they are laying a smokescreen to buy time for/distract attention from some quite different move.

I am going to guess something like "In light of the continuing negotiations, and the new strand involving UK and Ireland directly discussing the border on the island of Ireland, and to allow space for creative solutions to the very difficult issues which have dogged these negotiations, I will travel to Brussels today to ask the EU 27 to extend the A50 period until July."

FrancieBrady

What time is she in the HOC?

Hurrache

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

I am going to guess something like "In light of the continuing negotiations, and the new strand involving UK and Ireland directly discussing the border on the island of Ireland, and to allow space for creative solutions to the very difficult issues which have dogged these negotiations, I will travel to Brussels today to ask the EU 27 to extend the A50 period until July."

EU apparently don't want her over.
https://twitter.com/BBCkatyaadler/status/1087280640465293313

Although Katya Adler seems to be coming from an odd angle, maybe one of her sources it trying to dictate her narrative as this is an odd thing to say, for which she has been pulled up on.
https://twitter.com/BBCkatyaadler/status/1087280315939332096

Peregrinus

FrancieBrady wrote: »

What time is she in the HOC?

About 3:30, I think.

rusty the athlete

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

I will travel to Brussels today to ask the EU 27 to extend the A50 period until July."

I doubt it. She must have repeated at least 100,000 times since A50 passed that "We will be leaving the SM, .. the CU .. on March 29th 2019". The hole she has dug herself into over his is simply too deep to get out of now.

Peregrinus

Hurrache wrote: »

EU apparently don't want her over . . .

Although Katya Adler seems to be coming from an odd angle, maybe one of her sources it trying to dictate her narrative as this is an odd thing to say, for which she has been pulled up on . . .

Not wanting May to come over makes perfect sense. Indeed, logically, she shouldn't want to go; she should just pick up the phone. Face-to-face meeting between May and the EU leaders haven't generally gone well, and she ends up angry and humiliated. That's unlikely to help matters just now.

Leroy42

rusty the athlete wrote: »

I doubt it. She must have repeated at least 100,000 times since A50 passed that "We will be leaving the SM, .. the CU .. on March 29th 2019". The hole she has dug herself into over his is simply too deep to get out of now.

Well one thing that we can be sure of with TM, is that whatever her previous position makes no impact on what her final position will be.

Leroy42

Hurrache wrote: »

EU apparently don't want her over.
https://twitter.com/BBCkatyaadler/status/1087280640465293313

Although Katya Adler seems to be coming from an odd angle, maybe one of her sources it trying to dictate her narrative as this is an odd thing to say, for which she has been pulled up on.
https://twitter.com/BBCkatyaadler/status/1087280315939332096

What an odd thing to say.

She has made up this idea of a blame game, then when there is no evidence of it, comes up with a reason as to why the blame game (which she made up) hasn't happened!

Maybe, and based on the applause that Barnier received last week would appear to be the case, the EU think that Barnier did a great job. And of course, as can be seen from the fact that they gave in on the UK wide CU against Barniers initial insistence against it, that the EU were very much involved.

It seems Ms Adler seems to be of the view that Barnier has done a solo run and since the UK won't agree to the deal he has failed.

Which of course completely misses the point that the EU has already stated it is happy with the deal and ready to ratify and therefore the failure lies only with TM and her failure to sell the deal at home.

How Barnier can be blamed for that is a strange concept.

Mr.Wemmick

rusty the athlete wrote: »

I doubt it. She must have repeated at least 100,000 times since A50 passed that "We will be leaving the SM, .. the CU .. on March 29th 2019". The hole she has dug herself into over his is simply too deep to get out of now.

But like many posters have written on this thread: she will blame Ireland and NI problem for not allowing her a clear exit, so extend A50.. through no fault of her own. Bless.

What choice does she have? Brexit is undeliverable.

FrancieBrady

Mr.Wemmick wrote: »

But like many posters have written on this thread: she will blame Ireland and NI problem for not allowing her a clear exit, so extend A50.. through no fault of her own. Bless.

What choice does she have? Brexit is undeliverable.

It is if they had any faith or courage in their convictions of the UK's stated place in the world.

They are afraid to Brexit is the bottom line here.

seamus

Katya Adler has been pushing a strongy one-sided narrative of late. Same person who last week that got pulled up on claiming that Varadkar was on shaky ground at home - i.e. that his brexit hardline was weakening his support. Her defence was that she worded it badly and she meant the opposite - that he was holding onto the backstop in order to maintain home support.

Clearly based on her recent tweets though, the original meaning was the implied meaning. She's pushing the narrative that the reason a deal can't be reached is EU failures and intransigence, and it's the EU in trouble if a deal can't be reached.

MrMusician18

seamus wrote: »

Katya Adler has been pushing a strongy one-sided narrative of late. Same person who last week that got pulled up on claiming that Varadkar was on shaky ground at home - i.e. that his brexit hardline was weakening his support. Her defence was that she worded it badly and she meant the opposite - that he was holding onto the backstop in order to maintain home support.

Clearly based on her recent tweets though, the original meaning was the implied meaning. She's pushing the narrative that the reason a deal can't be reached is EU failures and intransigence, and it's the EU in trouble if a deal can't be reached.

I suspect all Katya's sources in the commission are British, and she is not looking critically at what she's being fed. She had been extremely poor on Brexit since this all began anyway. She won't be winning awards on her coverage.

FreudianSlippers

JRM doubling down this morning on LBC saying that "no deal" is the most likely and that people's vote is a non-runner. I take everything he says with a massive pinch of salt, but I think he is correct in his mindset of where the Tory party are at the moment.

lawred2

MrMusician18 wrote: »

I suspect all Katya's sources in the commission are British, and she is not looking critically at what she's being fed. She had been extremely poor on Brexit since this all began anyway. She won't be winning awards on her coverage.

Every time I've seen her report on the BBC I've been utterly bemused by her imbalanced and clearly erroneous reporting. Obviously the BBC are forcing an editorial bias but still no justification for such poor analysis and reporting.

She clearly has very few sources outside of British channels. Either because she's no made the effort to build them or as a journalist there is little regard for her in European channels..

Bit of both probably.

Mr.Wemmick

FrancieBrady wrote: »

It is if they had any faith or courage in their convictions of the UK's stated place in the world.

They are afraid to Brexit is the bottom line here.

The irony is that Brexit would bring business/ corporate & private industry to its knees - the money source and bloodline for the Tory party, and damage their ideology of wealth creation, haha! It really is bonkers! There is no way out for May.. so Ireland will get the blame for not allowing her to tweak and change the GFA.

They must have spent the whole weekend dreaming this one up.

Sam Russell

FrancieBrady wrote: »

What time is she in the HOC?

At the same time Michael D is in the Mansion House to commemorate the holding of the first Dail. Leo et al will be there.

[Ironic or what?]

mrbrianj

Leroy42 wrote: »

Lets try to follow this 'bi-lateral talks' idea. So UK and Ireland have talks, aimed at coming to a specific arrangement which removes the need for a backstop. But even if the EU, through the prize of continued peace in NI, allowed this to happen, they are no going to allow it to be the agreement for the entire EU.

So in effect it will be limited to NI and possibly trade with Ireland/UK. So in effect the UK are saying that they are opening to treating NI differently than the rest of the UK, which if I am not mistaken is the entire basis for the DUP raging against the deal.

We have to steer clear of Bi-lateral talks on an open border. The UK will try to "flip" us into an open border with NI/UK but with a border in the sea between us and the EU. Gives then exactly what they want and screws us out of the EU.

If we talk but just to say no, the pressure will be ramped up anyway until 30th March and it will be coming from both sides. Now is the time to show that we are one of 27.

LeinsterDub

https://twitter.com/adamfleming/status/1087320272003366917

If true expect the EU 26 to put them back in their box right fast.

lawred2

LeinsterDub wrote: »

https://twitter.com/adamfleming/status/1087320272003366917

If true expect the EU 26 to put them back in their box right fast.

I'm sure that there are a few eastern bloc members who couldn't give less of a toss about the backstop..

I'm sure Hungary will lend their 'weight' to such calls but ultimately I would expect the determination to uphold an international peace accord will put such calls to bed.

However watch as the UK Tories will start lauding such initiatives by their Polish 'friends'

josip

What's Poland's angle on this?

1. Genuine interest in achieving a May Deal Brexit for its own citizens in UK?
2. Historical resentment to EU regarding border issues because of the previously mentioned Ukraine border.
3. Trouble making because the EU are censuring their purge on the judiciary?

Necro

Lol, what the hell do Eastern Europeans know of Irish history and the troubles?

It's like asking Michael Flatley to comment on Polish GDP. If it's true it's a nonsensical move.

seamus

Kind of irrelevant anyway. 5 years may as well be indefinite for Brexiteers. They'd never accept anything longer than a few months.

But ultimately it doesn't address the issue. The purpose of the backstop is to answer the question of "what do we do if our agreed border position breaks down"?

If you add a 5-year expiry to the backstop, then you just create a new question: "What happens after that?"

FrancieBrady

LeinsterDub wrote: »

https://twitter.com/adamfleming/status/1087320272003366917

If true expect the EU 26 to put them back in their box right fast.

1 year - 5 years, what's the difference really. What's the foreign minister's feelings on the EU I wonder.

Hurrache

LeinsterDub wrote: »

https://twitter.com/adamfleming/status/1087320272003366917

If true expect the EU 26 to put them back in their box right fast.

The BBC will be willing for the other 26 to row in behind him.

Meanwhile, in reality
https://twitter.com/tconnellyRTE/status/1087317144587722754
https://twitter.com/tconnellyRTE/status/1087317149159514113

Professor Moriarty

josip wrote: »

What's Poland's angle on this?

1. Genuine interest in achieving a May Deal Brexit for its own citizens in UK?
2. Historical resentment to EU regarding border issues because of the previously mentioned Ukraine border.
3. Trouble making because the EU are censuring their purge on the judiciary?

All of the above plus cosying up to fellow populists.

FreudianSlippers

josip wrote: »

What's Poland's angle on this?

1. Genuine interest in achieving a May Deal Brexit for its own citizens in UK?
2. Historical resentment to EU regarding border issues because of the previously mentioned Ukraine border.
3. Trouble making because the EU are censuring their purge on the judiciary?

All why the EU wouldn't likely capitulate to this - it would undermine the fundamental core of the EU.

As an aside, would Polexit be significantly damaging to anyone other than Polish nationals living in the EU?

An Ciarraioch

FreudianSlippers wrote: »

All why the EU wouldn't likely capitulate to this - it would undermine the fundamental core of the EU.

As an aside, would Polexit be significantly damaging to anyone other than Polish nationals living in the EU?

I presume the net benefit is the only reason Law and Justice is currently pro-EU.

seamus

seamus wrote: »

Kind of irrelevant anyway. 5 years may as well be indefinite for Brexiteers. They'd never accept anything longer than a few months.

But ultimately it doesn't address the issue. The purpose of the backstop is to answer the question of "what do we do if our agreed border position breaks down"?

If you add a 5-year expiry to the backstop, then you just create a new question: "What happens after that?"

How about a two-year backstop and if nothing is reached, they have to rejoin the CU.. The Brexiters would hate it, but it's not likely they'd get many trade deals done in those two years anyways.

Edit: Would never work. We'd just run down the clock if something better was available.

An Claidheamh

First Up wrote: »

The UK has always seen Ireland as a source of leverage in negotiations with the EU. The hope is that the desire for a borderless Ireland will outweigh everything else and "force" the EU to concede a free trade deal without strings attached.

Try explaining to them that they're the ones using it to stay in!

johnnyskeleton

mrbrianj wrote: »

We have to steer clear of Bi-lateral talks on an open border. The UK will try to "flip" us into an open border with NI/UK but with a border in the sea between us and the EU. Gives then exactly what they want and screws us out of the EU.

Would it be that bad of an idea? The amount of goods that might seek to enter mainland EU via Ireland from the UK must be very small. It would be easy enough to implement, would bring customs jobs to Wexford and Cork, and carrying out an adminstrative check "in the celtic sea" is far less politically sensitive as an administrative check "in the Irish sea".

If France and Benelux play ball and it wont be too onerous, why not look into it? It may mean sacrificing national pride, but I think we are above such petty squabbling, especially if it means extra EU money to pay our civil servants.