Brexit Discussion Thread VI

sandbelter

View wrote: »

Of course we can join Schengen. Schengen is a fundamental objective of the EU, clearly laid out in the treaties. (Or to be more specific, Schengen is laid out as the practiacal implementation of the objective).

Re ditching the CTA

First, I think you have to play the long game here, as some point there will be Unification referendum. We don't know were Scotland will sit at this time but having a open door for the UK form many in the North will be comforting ...even if it only for a few years to discover that everyone (including the English) sees them as being Irish. Worse, lose of the CTA could be manipulated to result nationalists in NI being forced to lose their Irish identity.

I know that we haven't had the best of times with our neighbor and its looking more and more like no deal. But, worst affected will be the working English, many of whose families originated in Ireland. Many of these may not qualify for a passport. For them the CTA could end up being their only opportunity both to return to Ireland and get a job.

Finally, we won't force families to choose sides....that is what the brexitters are doing and I regard it as uncivilized. We should recognize there are many families that are made up of dual nationals, lets work with that.

For the record, I'm not in a relationship with someone from the UK.

We are made of better stuff.

Peregrinus

BorneTobyWilde wrote: »

Irish Government,
'' no room to move on '' back stop'' it's in deal and deal is not getting reopened, its there to avoid a hard border''

EU
'' Not reopening Brexit deal, it was agreed and signed by all parties, back stop remains to avoid hard border''

But how on earth can they both say this when a No Deal leads to a hard border.
Seems they have no choice, reopen Brexit deal, or it's no deal and a hard border !
Answer is obvious,, reopen deal and work back stop out so that everyone is happy, no one wants a hard border so it can't be difficult to agree something when all parties are on same page and want the same thing.

The glaring omission in this happy little story is any particulars of the I-can't-believe-it's-not-a-backstop! that will (a) be acceptable to the UK and the EU, and (b) guarantee no hard border. You say "It can't be difficult" to agree this, but your opinion flies in the face of the evidence; nobody has managed to do it in the past two-and-a-half years, so it seems it is difficult.

Not coincidentally, the Brady amendment also lacks any alternative to the backstop. Basically, it says "we'd like an alternative to the backstop, please, but we're not telling you what alternative. Nor are we attempting even to set out any parameters or indicators of broadly what kind of alternative we might find acceptable. We reserve the right to dismiss any alternative you may propose, for reasons which we will decide at the time."

This is not a serious attempt to reopen negotiations over the backstop. At this stage of the game, anybody rejecting any text in the WA needs to be proposing alternative text, not sitting around waiting for the fairies to do it.

And they also need to be sending out negotiators who have some credibility. Last time they sent May, who did negotiate an agreement. But not only was that agreement not acceptable to Parliament; she herself wouldn't even recommend it to Parliament. She voted against it, and urged others to do the same. They propose, apparently, to leave her in place as PM, yet clearly it is impossible for the EU to negotiate anything with her or any government led by her, because she now has no credibility as someone who can negotiate anything deliverable, or even anything she will stand over herself.

Tl;dr: basically, Brexiters haven't moved on at all. Nearly three years ago they secured endorsement in a refernedum for a Brexit that they were careful not to define, because in fact they had no agreement among themselves what Brexit meant or even what it was for, and any attempt to be specific would expose this and would cause support for Brexit to splinter. Now, they've secured a Commons motion endorsing an alternative to the backstop, but they do not define or descrive the alternative that they support and, almost certainly, this is because they either have no idea or they have different and inconsistent ideas about it.

Folkstonian

An Claidheamh wrote: »

https://youtu.be/4Y7nECrjd40

At 4:20, you see another arrogant and clueless BBC presenter out of her depth donning the union jack, and once again having to be schooled by a foreigner about their own country.

Your posting style is really snide when it comes to the damned Brits, isn’t it?

https://youtu.be/YBfTdHK4-zw

And here is a clip of the same newsnight presenter telling a government minister to ‘park the unicorns’ when he suggests renegotiation with the EU

Political journalists routinely test the robustness of arguments by playing the devil’s advocate

If you watched newsnight with any frequency you’d see Emily Maitliss tearing into brexiteers.

It’s quite a surprise that so many people fail to understand this basic concept

An Claidheamh

Folkstonian wrote: »

Your posting style is really snide when it comes to the damned Brits, isn’t it?

https://youtu.be/YBfTdHK4-zw

And here is a clip of the same newsnight presenter telling a government minister to ‘park the unicorns’ when he suggests renegotiation with the EU

Political journalists routinely test the robustness of arguments by playing the devil’s advocate

If you watched newsnight with any frequency you’d see Emily Maitliss tearing into brexiteers.

It’s quite a surprise that so many people fail to understand this basic concept

I'm sorry, but she had a German gentleman taking time to talk to her and she tries to ambush him with nonsense.

A waste of time.

Calina

sandbelter wrote: »

Many of these may not qualify for a passport. For them the CTA could end up being their only opportunity both to return to Ireland and get a job.

.

People who have lived in the UK all their lives and their nearest Irish born antecedent is a great grand parent at best? Coming _back_ to Ireland?

Massive numbers of people in the UK qualify for Irish passports. I don't understand the concept of _return_ for people who need the CTA to return as they are not entitled to citizenship. And tbf a lot of people who recently claimed aren't looking for Irish citizenship but European citizenship.

Fr Tod Umptious

Folkstonian wrote: »

Your posting style is really snide when it comes to the damned Brits, isn’t it?

https://youtu.be/YBfTdHK4-zw

And here is a clip of the same newsnight presenter telling a government minister to ‘park the unicorns’ when he suggests renegotiation with the EU

Political journalists routinely test the robustness of arguments by playing the devil’s advocate

If you watched newsnight with any frequency you’d see Emily Maitliss tearing into brexiteers.

It’s quite a surprise that so many people fail to understand this basic concept

I find Maitliss to be very even handed in these.
I don't get the notion at all that she is clueless as some around here do.

She was pretty tough on some brexiteer MP lady earlier in the show

v638sg7k1a92bx

MP's pass a vote for alternatives on backstop. Is Ireland being lined up to take the fall here with the EU and UK making an agreement behind our back?

Peregrinus

Shawn Worried Pellet wrote: »

MP's pass a vote for alternatives on backstop. Is Ireland being lined up to take the fall here with the EU and UK making an agreement behind our back?

No.

Fr Tod Umptious

Shawn Worried Pellet wrote: »

MP's pass a vote for alternatives on backstop. Is Ireland being lined up to take the fall here with the EU and UK making an agreement behind our back?

No far from it, it would be a huge turnaround for the EU to do that after all they have said today let alone over the past 2 plus years.

There was some guy on the panel on BBC Newsnight last night suggesting that May head straight for Berlin rather than Brussels because as he said Germany calls the tune in the EU.

That may be the case about Germany calling the tune but I doubt May would get very far circumventing the rest of the 27.

A Dub in Glasgo

Shawn Worried Pellet wrote: »

MP's pass a vote for alternatives on backstop. Is Ireland being lined up to take the fall here with the EU and UK making an agreement behind our back?

Not a chance

Peregrinus

Fr Tod Umptious wrote: »

No far from it, it would be a huge turnaround for the EU to do that after all they have said today let alone over the past 2 plus years.

There was some guy on the panel on BBC Newsnight last night suggesting that May head straight for Berlin rather than Brussels because as he said Germany calls the tune in the EU.

That may be the case about Germany calling the tune but I doubt May would get very far circumventing the rest of the 27.

This is a variation on the "German auto industry will save us!" tune that the Brexiters have been singing constantly since 2016 to ward off the night terrors.

HMG has tried repeatedly over the past three years to persuade Germany to influence the EU to accommodate the UK. They have tried approaching the Federal government. They have tried approaching State governments and asking them to press the Federal government. They have tried approaching German industry groups and asking them to do the same. They have failed every time, usually in a humiliatingly public fashion. It's not that the EU has refused to bend to German pressure; it's that the UK has been unable to persuade Germany to apply any pressure. Germany is entirely happy with the EU's current stance.

If the same tactic is tried again, it's going to fail again.

Christy42

The CTA has to be kept up if at all possible. I.e. unless the UK ends it which they show no signs of doing.

Right now a hard border is looking more and more likely but Ireland needs to be open to further dialogue to open back up the border asap for the good of both sides of the border.

Schengen would stop any chance of that happening. If we keep the CTA the UK will likely agree to a backstop of some sort pretty quick to get a trade deal once reality hits harder than rhetoric.

Chips Lovell

I did wonder if they'd run out of ways to avoid dealing with the reality of the situation, but last night indicated that there's still an appetite there for kicking the can down the road.

There are only three choices: Not leaving, hard Brexit, or the current deal (unless the red lines change). That's it. May knows this. Most MPs know this. Yet, for political reasons, not enough of them want to acknowledge it.

Calina

Christy42 wrote: »

The CTA has to be kept up if at all possible. I.e. unless the UK ends it which they show no signs of doing.

Right now a hard border is looking more and more likely but Ireland needs to be open to further dialogue to open back up the border asap for the good of both sides of the border.

Schengen would stop any chance of that happening. If we keep the CTA the UK will likely agree to a backstop of some sort pretty quick to get a trade deal once reality hits harder than rhetoric.

You have too much faith in England.

Peregrinus

Christy42 wrote: »

The CTA has to be kept up if at all possible. I.e. unless the UK ends it which they show no signs of doing.

Right now a hard border is looking more and more likely but Ireland needs to be open to further dialogue to open back up the border asap for the good of both sides of the border.

Schengen would stop any chance of that happening. If we keep the CTA the UK will likely agree to a backstop of some sort pretty quick to get a trade deal once reality hits harder than rhetoric.

I am bemused by the discussion of the CTA. I don't see that it's under any real threat.

People have speculated in this thread that in the event of a crash-out Brexit with accompanying hard border Ireland might come under pressure to joing Schengen (and so end the CTA). But this makes no sense to me; the EU's policy on Brexit has been shaped to an impressive degree by a focus on minimising the impact on the Irish border. To require Ireland to join Schengen would maximise the impact on the Irish border; the EU absolutely, definitely does not want that, and neither does Ireland. And neither does the UK. Even if there's a hard border for trade, it's in nobody's interest to make it a hard border for travel/migration as well.

In all possible Brexit scenarios, the CTA looks reasonably safe to me.

Calina

UK is sending a couple of additional negotiators apparently - Crawford Falconer and Julian Braithewaite. CF was hired in 2017 to do the follow up trade deals. Braithewaite is at WTO I think.

CF is apparently ex Legatum Institute per his wiki bio which is short on detail. Ex head trade negotiator for NZ apparently.

lawred2

Fr Tod Umptious wrote: »

No far from it, it would be a huge turnaround for the EU to do that after all they have said today let alone over the past 2 plus years.

There was some guy on the panel on BBC Newsnight last night suggesting that May head straight for Berlin rather than Brussels because as he said Germany calls the tune in the EU.

That may be the case about Germany calling the tune but I doubt May would get very far circumventing the rest of the 27.

Was that not Davis' plan two and a half years ago. Head straight to Berlin to negotiate the easiest withdrawal deal ever.

Seth Brundle

Calina wrote: »

UK is sending a couple of additional negotiators apparently - Crawford Falconer and Julian Braithewaite. CF was hired in 2017 to do the follow up trade deals. Braithewaite is at WTO I think.

CF is apparently ex Legatum Institute per his wiki bio which is short on detail. Ex head trade negotiator for NZ apparently.

Being a skilled negotiator is of Sweet FA use when negotiations are long closed!

Calina

Seth Brundle wrote: »

Being a skilled negotiator is of Sweet FA use when negotiations are long closed!

Even so they need more than two weeks to get up to speed....

v638sg7k1a92bx

Peregrinus wrote: »

No.

Fair enough. If they EU were to capitulate now what's to stop the UK from doing the same in every other negotiation with the EU.

Peregrinus

Calina wrote: »

UK is sending a couple of additional negotiators apparently - Crawford Falconer and Julian Braithewaite. CF was hired in 2017 to do the follow up trade deals. Braithewaite is at WTO I think.

CF is apparently ex Legatum Institute per his wiki bio which is short on detail. Ex head trade negotiator for NZ apparently.

Falconer's a highly experienced and very well-regarded trade negotiatiator. The UK hired him in 2017 because, for obvious reasons, they had a dearth of experienced trade negotiatiators, and they reckoned they were going to need some.

There have been stories in the papers from time to time that he has been on the brink of resigning, reportedly because the Withdrawal Agreement is likely to restrict the UK's ability to do trade deals in ways that he did not expect (and was not led to expect) when he was recruited. Meaning, he wouldn't be able to do the job he thought he was being hired to do.

Not sure of the significance of adding him to the negotiating team for the Withdrawal Agreement at this point, given that the WA is essentially finalised. He would always, I think, have been expected to be involved in negotiating the Future Relationship Agreement. Appointing him now may be intended to lend colour to the pretence that the UK expects renegotiation of the WA.

Bigus

US Congress get behind opposing hard border .

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/world/us/resolution-opposing-hard-irish-border-introduced-in-us-congress-1.3775295

Zubeneschamali

briany wrote: »

If Ireland is going to get the same result whether pushing for a backstop or accepting border controls, then we may as well go with the option that is at least being seen to lean towards Irish interests, tries to safeguard the Peace Process and doesn't constitute a major U-turn.

It's much simpler than that - the UK cannot go with No Deal. If they are actually mad and not bluffing, it will cripple them in weeks and they'll be back to the table in desperation.



And then they will honour their commitment to the backstop. Or else.

Peregrinus

"US Congressman gets behind opposing hard border."

Fixed that for you. Remains to be seen how much attention/action this will get from Congress as a whole.

Infini

Shawn Worried Pellet wrote: »

MP's pass a vote for alternatives on backstop. Is Ireland being lined up to take the fall here with the EU and UK making an agreement behind our back?

Not a chance of this. The UK is diplomatocally and morally bankrupt at this point. Their politics are utterly without shame or interest in facts. They only care about their narrow interests not the common good. The EU isnt going to abandon Ireland on something like this they have standards unlike the UK which have no problem abandoning a 20 year peace agreement for the sake of nothing.

If anything even if we have to put up a border the UK will end up paying a huge price for it in the long term.

Calina

Peregrinus wrote: »

Falconer's a highly experienced and very well-regarded trade negotiatiator. The UK hired him in 2017 because, for obvious reasons, they had a dearth of experienced trade negotiatiators, and they reckoned they were going to need some.

There have been stories in the papers from time to time that he has been on the brink of resigning, reportedly because the Withdrawal Agreement is likely to restrict the UK's ability to do trade deals in ways that he did not expect (and was not led to expect) when he was recruited. Meaning, he wouldn't be able to do the job he thought he was being hired to do.

Not sure of the significance of adding him to the negotiating team for the Withdrawal Agreement at this point, given that the WA is essentially finalised. He would always, I think, have been expected to be involved in negotiating the Future Relationship Agreement. Appointing him now may be intended to lend colour to the pretence that the UK expects renegotiation of the WA.

To be honest I think these are cosmetic changes. Regardless of how good they are they and even if the EU was reopening, it is difficult to see them getting up to speed quickly enough for another lot of votes on Feb 13.

But your comment highlights a key issue. The UK government has put a great deal more effort into managing perception than delivery or so it seems.

Zubeneschamali

briany wrote: »

I'm having a hard time seeing how no-deal is avoidable.

The House of commons didn't take control last night because they are cowards, but there is another similar opportunity on Valentines day. I'd suggest the EU just don't answer any calls from London until after that vote.

Zubeneschamali

Joe_ Public wrote: »

One scenario I’ve seen posited several places is that even if a no deal happens it won’t take place before the end of march, they’d need to get a short extension to facilitate it, and under the terms of the bet, it would be a loser.

No-one will give them an extension just to make No Deal nicer for them.

Infini

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

The House of commons didn't take control last night because they are cowards, but there is another similar opportunity on Valentines day. I'd suggest the EU just don't answer any calls from London until after that vote.

If May tries going over they should refuse to see her tbh it would send a message that they wont talk until such a time as trust is restored. Blatent lying should always have a price.

Fr Tod Umptious

Peregrinus wrote: »

"US Congressman gets behind opposing hard border."

Fixed that for you. Remains to be seen how much attention/action this will get from Congress as a whole.

Yes and it's the same crongressman that has been quoted a few times here since the votes last night.

It's no different than one TD or MP offering an opinion on something.