Brexit Discussion Thread VI

Fr Tod Umptious

Infini wrote: »

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.

I don't think they should refuse to meet her.

She should certainly be welcomed and then told during a short meeting that there will be no scope for changing the WA.

Peregrinus

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.

Infini wrote: »

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.

If the Malthouse compromise were a real thing, the obvious course of events would be:

- A public process by which Parliament formulates an alternative to the backstop, or at the very least a set of paramaters/negotiating instructions for what would be an alternative to the backstop. The alternative/parameters must be (a) practicable, (b) effective to avoid a hard border, and (c) have a realistic prospect of being acceptable to the EU. And the process by which it is arrived at must be such as to reassure people that if EU deals on those terms, Parliament will ratify the WA. That means public buy-in from (at least) the ERG and the DUP, but ideally broader support than that.

- HMG then takes this to Brussels and invites a response.

Since the Malthouse compromise is a sham, none of this will happen. May will engage in limited, confidential parliamentary consultations, and then go to Brussels "keeping her cards close to its chest".

If Brussels refuses to entertain any approach from HMG at this point, Brussels will be the bad guy, and the vote on 13 Feb will probably cement movement towards a no-deal Brexit.

So Brussels should (and will) hear what May has to say. In all likelihood May will be humiliated (again) because she won't have a feasible proposal to put to Brussels that she can credibly assure them that Parliament will endorse. Brussels will instead propose some fairly token tweak to the Political Declaration - perhaps a beefed up process for periodically reviewing the backstop, should it come into operation - but it will not give the UK a unilateral exit mechanism or a fixed expiry date.

May then goes back to Parliament and says "I did my best; this is as good as it gets; it really is this or no-deal". That might work. It certainly has a better chance of working than if the EU simply refuses to talk to May.

So it's in the EU's interests not to stonewall May. Let her make her pitch, if only to expose the vacuity of it. Make a gesture on the Political Declaration, if only to avoid having it said that the EU refused to compromise. The facts should change slightly by February 13 if only because, if they don't, it's difficult for Parliament to change the decision it made yesterday. The EU does want it to change that decision, and has an interest in not obstructing such a change.

Akrasia

Fr Tod Umptious wrote: »

I don't think they should refuse to meet her.

She should certainly be welcomed and then told during a short meeting that there will be no scope for changing the WA.

Nope, she deserves to be completely snubbed. She has invited herself over to a negotiation that is not scheduled to take place. She is showing contempt for the negotiation process and by traveling to Brussels she is intentionally wasting everyone's time and money

Enzokk

Folkstonian wrote: »

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

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 agree with you that she has to play devil's advocate and ask tough questions, what she doesn't have to do is have a sarcastic "okay" when he states that what today did was shore up the Tory party. A presenter is supposed to be neutral and her showing disdain for his opinion is somewhat arrogant.

I mean look at what happened today, Theresa May rowed back on her own deal and asked parliament to vote against it with a amendment backed by the chair of the 1922 committee and it had ERG support. There was no evidence that she has listened to anyone but her own inner circle or the Tory party. She did this to give herself another two weeks in charge to find that magical solution which is not going to happen.

Any journalist should have seen this but to dismiss it like she did? The part I am talking about is around 5:28 on the first video. Also, as Peregrinus posted below there has hardly been any indication that Germany is getting nervous enough to reopen the negotiations over no-deal yet she says there has been a few indications about this. Maybe I missed it and maybe you can point them out to me but I have not seen these indications she thinks are there, so what is she talking about?

Peregrinus wrote: »

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.

What is the supposed Einstein quote on insanity?

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.

If the reports of hin being unhappy about his brief having changed with the WA, I don't see him going to the EU as a good thing for getting a deal. We know May will not drop the DUP so it only seems to point to no-deal surely?

Also, reading who is behind and works for the Lagatum Institute makes me very concerned. Seems that some of their staff has left to join the IEA who is a secretly funded right wing think tank. Falconer himself seems to want a hard Brexit and then you have Philippa Stroud who is the CEO. She was very much involved with Universal Credit which has been having a few glitches (it has been a failure). Also involved is Gisela Stuart, who was Chair of Vote Leave which has been accused and found guilty of breaking election rules for overspending and which we still don't know what they did and who they talked to.

So, pull up our pants and buckle the belts tightly, we are heading for trouble when you see who is calling the shots and having a PM more concerned about her position and her party than the country.

Zubeneschamali

Peregrinus wrote: »

The facts should change slightly by February 13 if only because, if they don't, it's difficult for Parliament to change the decision it made yesterday. The EU does want it to change that decision, and has an interest in not obstructing such a change.

May is utterly untrustworthy, instructing her own MPs to vote against her own deal the EU agreed with her. There is no point in talking to her further - her word is worthless. Rewarding her for this by offering concessions is just inviting more bad behaviour.


I think the EU should stick to repeating yesterday's statements - the deal is on the table. Most MPs signalled that they don't want No Deal - fine, let them sort it out.

FrancieBrady

Enzokk wrote: »

If the reports of hin being unhappy about his brief having changed with the WA, I don't see him going to the EU as a good thing for getting a deal. We know May will not drop the DUP so it only seems to point to no-deal surely?
.

She won't drop the DUP and they won't drop her either IMO.

I can see revocation of the whole sorry mess at this stage and that will suit the DUP too.

We know from the AIA and the GFA that they will do plenty of whinging and shouting but quietly accept and work with it.

Peregrinus

Enzokk wrote: »

If the reports of hin being unhappy about his brief having changed with the WA, I don't see him going to the EU as a good thing for getting a deal. We know May will not drop the DUP so it only seems to point to no-deal surely?

Also, reading who is behind and works for the Lagatum Institute makes me very concerned. Seems that some of their staff has left to join the IEA who is a secretly funded right wing think tank. Falconer himself seems to want a hard Brexit and then you have Philippa Stroud who is the CEO. She was very much involved with Universal Credit which has been having a few glitches (it has been a failure). Also involved is Gisela Stuart, who was Chair of Vote Leave which has been accused and found guilty of breaking election rules for overspending and which we still don't know what they did and who they talked to.

Yeah, but despite the company he keeps Falconer is an experienced and well-regarded trade negotiator. Which means that he perfectly understands that there isn't a snowball's chance in hell of the backstop provisions in the Withdrawal Agreement being dropped or amended. He knows that he's going to be part of a team that comes back and says "this can't be done".

I think the point of putting him on the team is twofold. First, it's a gesture of respect towards the ERG - "we regard you as part of the team". (Falconer isn't part of the ERG, obviously, but he's someone whose instinct and judgment they trust.) But, secondly, if Falconer comes back and says "yep, there really is no give in Brussels on this", that carries more weight with the ERG than if the advisers May has been using say it. The ERG is more likely to accept the reality if Falconer says it's the reality, and they are more embarrassed/more isolated if they reject a position endorsed, however reluctantly, by the likes of Falconer.

(At least, that's part of what May hopes to acheive with this appointment.)

Calina

Peregrinus wrote: »

Yeah, but despite the company he keeps Falconer is an experienced and well-regarded trade negotiator. Which means that he perfectly understands that there isn't a snowball's chance in hell of the backstop provisions in the Withdrawal Agreement being dropped or amended. He knows that he's going to be part of a team that comes back and says "this can't be done".

I think the point of putting him on the team is twofold. First, it's a gesture of respect towards the ERG - "we regard you as part of the team". (Falconer isn't part of the ERG, obviously, but he's someone whose instinct and judgment they trust.) But, secondly, if Falconer comes back and says "yep, there really is no give in Brussels on this", that carries more weight with the ERG than if the advisers May has been using say it. The ERG is more likely to accept the reality if Falconer says it's the reality, and they are more embarrassed/more isolated if they reject a position endorsed, however reluctantly, by the likes of Falconer.

(At least, that's part of what May hopes to acheive with this appointment.)

Tbh I strongly suspect that they will turn on him if he says it cannot be done.

RobMc59

Peregrinus wrote: »

Yeah, but despite the company he keeps Falconer is an experienced and well-regarded trade negotiator. Which means that he perfectly understands that there isn't a snowball's chance in hell of the backstop provisions in the Withdrawal Agreement being dropped or amended. He knows that he's going to be part of a team that comes back and says "this can't be done".

I think the point of putting him on the team is twofold. First, it's a gesture of respect towards the ERG - "we regard you as part of the team". (Falconer isn't part of the ERG, obviously, but he's someone whose instinct and judgment they trust.) But, secondly, if Falconer comes back and says "yep, there really is no give in Brussels on this", that carries more weight with the ERG than if the advisers May has been using say it. The ERG is more likely to accept the reality if Falconer says it's the reality, and they are more embarrassed/more isolated if they reject a position endorsed, however reluctantly, by the likes of Falconer.

(At least, that's part of what May hopes to acheive with this appointment.)

So what your saying is the person who probably should have gone to negotiate with the EU in the first place is being sent when it's gone past negotiation!-His name escapes me but even a tory MP said last night this result will affect the tories for a long time-they will be known as the party that destroys people's lives and the country ...

Enzokk

FrancieBrady wrote: »

She won't drop the DUP and they won't drop her either IMO.

I can see revocation of the whole sorry mess at this stage and that will suit the DUP too.

We know from the AIA and the GFA that they will do plenty of whinging and shouting but quietly accept and work with it.

Honestly I would have thought this was the most likely but it would be the end of May. I cannot see how she will sacrifice herself for Brexit and not getting it done. She has tied her legacy to the UK leaving the EU and if she is as hardheaded as she claims, and which her actions suggest, I cannot see her doing it.

Peregrinus wrote: »

Yeah, but despite the company he keeps Falconer is an experienced and well-regarded trade negotiator. Which means that he perfectly understands that there isn't a snowball's chance in hell of the backstop provisions in the Withdrawal Agreement being dropped or amended. He knows that he's going to be part of a team that comes back and says "this can't be done".

I think the point of putting him on the team is twofold. First, it's a gesture of respect towards the ERG - "we regard you as part of the team". (Falconer isn't part of the ERG, obviously, but he's someone whose instinct and judgment they trust.) But, secondly, if Falconer comes back and says "yep, there really is no give in Brussels on this", that carries more weight with the ERG than if the advisers May has been using say it. The ERG is more likely to accept the reality if Falconer says it's the reality, and they are more embarrassed/more isolated if they reject a position endorsed, however reluctantly, by the likes of Falconer.

(At least, that's part of what May hopes to acheive with this appointment.)

And yet the Legatum Institute released a paper saying the way forward was having drones patrol the border. Or basically having a border but not at the border, which Micheal Martin also proposed but was shot down by the EU. Other suggestions is to have a EU Special Body assess when security needs to be tightened at the, you guessed it the border.

Brexit: Airships could patrol Irish border, says think tank

A think tank has suggested that drones or airships could be used to monitor the Irish border after Brexit.

The idea is raised in a paper from the Legatum Institute, examining how the UK and EU could resolve the border issue.

It states that "persistent surveillance of the border region" could be achieved through patrols by unmanned aerial vehicles or deployment of aerostats.

But it concedes "that these solutions are subject to a number of limitations, not least weather and cost".

And here is another quote,

It also suggests that the Special EU Programmes Body, which manages cross-border EU funding, should be repurposed after Brexit to deal with cross-border trade.

It says it could "be used to monitor the border, conducting risk assessments and advising when border security should be tightened or relaxed."

We will have to wait and see what happens but I am not optimistic by having someone going to the EU who sees no problem with a border. I don't know whether the EU telling him no would change his mind, never mind the ERG.

Peregrinus

Calina wrote: »

Tbh I strongly suspect that they will turn on him if he says it cannot be done.

He won't say it publicly. he won't say anything publicly; he's just a civil servant advising the PM. And because he won't have adopted a public position there'll be no occasion to turn on him.

Yes, the ERG may reject his views. But having him as an adviser to May, and involved in the negotiation, does give the negotiating team's views and conclusions as to what is and isn't achievable more credibility with the ERG than they would have if he were not involved.

On edit: Enzokk, remember, this guy is a trade negotiator, not a customs official or a border security expert. People in Legatum may hold weird views about airships and drones and the like, but you shouldn't impute them to him, even though he worked with Legatum for a time. If anything, I think he would tend to be of the view that favours radical deregulation and open borders.

downcow

I am only dipping in to roi media and news programmes but looking from outside roi they seem to be doing you a disservice. It seems they are currently just mouthpieces for government. They are speaking as one voice. They seem afraid to even mention the possibility of negotiations opening, which suggests to me they and the politicians know rightly that more negotiations are a real possibility.
British media is discussing all possibilities
For a moment forget how certain you are that negotiations are over. Can you not see what I am saying about the politicians and media supporting each other (and indeed you guys on here)?

All these phrases like liers etc being used for TM etc for suggesting that negotiations may open again on backstpp. Will you guys call your politicians and Eu politicians liers etc, if backstop is amended??

I am honest enough to say I ‘think’ the backstop will be amended. Of course I am not certain. You guys are either certain or you are unsure and scarred to show any chinks in your thinking.

Interesting days ahead

Skelet0n

https://www.bbc.com/news/business-47036119

US firms seek changes to UK standards on beef and drugs

They stand no chance negotiating against the US, how they don't see this is beyond me. Terrifying.

Enzokk

downcow wrote: »

I am only dipping in to roi media and news programme but looking from outside roi them seem to be doing you a disservice. It seems they are currently just mouthpieces for government. Theft are speaking as one voice. They seem afraid to even mention the possibility of negotiations opening which suggests to me they and they politicians know rightly that more negotiations are a real possibility.
British media is discussing all possibilities
For a moment forget how certain you are that negotiations are over. Can you not see what I am saying about the politicians and media supporting each other (and indeed you guys on here)?

All these phrases like liers etc being used for TM etc for suggesting that negotiations may open again on backstpp. Will you guys call your politicians and Eu politicians liers etc, if backstop is amended??

I am honest enough to say I ‘think’ the backstop will be amended. Of course I am not certain. You guys are either certain or you are unsure and scarred to show any chinks in your thinking.

Interesting days ahead

If they reopen the negotiations after saying it was done when May offers nothing new, yes I will call them liars.

If May goes to the EU and says she is willing to drop her red lines then there is something to talk about.

Calina

Peregrinus wrote: »

He won't say it publicly. he won't say anything publicly; he's just a civil servant advising the PM. And because he won't have adopted a public position there'll be no occasion to turn on him.

Yes, the ERG may reject his views. But having him as an adviser to May, and involved in the negotiation, does give the negotiating team's views and conclusions as to what is and isn't achievable more credibility with the ERG than they would have if he were not involved.

Olly Robbins is just a civil servant too.

The point is the ERG do not do self redlection and many Brexit supporters do not do nuance.

Macy0161

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.

Could guess it was a clip from last nights Newsnight. So many things have been damaged by Brexit - for me, one of the lesser things is the quality of the BBC current affairs output. I watched the votes and aftermath on BBC News Channel, and Maitlis wasn't alone. The first one to call out the Brady Motion as having no content and things being no clearer was actually Fiona Mitchell on Newsnight. Not that she or the other guest got much room to talk as Maitlis let Digby Jones run roughshod over the discussion.

Enzokk

Calina wrote: »

Olly Robbins is just a civil servant too.

The point is the ERG do not do self redlection and many Brexit supporters do not do nuance.

So is Mark Carney and they had no problem turning on him and attacking him. We should not dismiss the need for politicians not to accept the blame for anything that is their fault.

FrancieBrady

downcow wrote: »

I am only dipping in to roi media and news programmes but looking from outside roi they seem to be doing you a disservice. It seems they are currently just mouthpieces for government. They are speaking as one voice. They seem afraid to even mention the possibility of negotiations opening, which suggests to me they and the politicians know rightly that more negotiations are a real possibility.
British media is discussing all possibilities
For a moment forget how certain you are that negotiations are over. Can you not see what I am saying about the politicians and media supporting each other (and indeed you guys on here)?

All these phrases like liers etc being used for TM etc for suggesting that negotiations may open again on backstpp. Will you guys call your politicians and Eu politicians liers etc, if backstop is amended??

I am honest enough to say I ‘think’ the backstop will be amended. Of course I am not certain. You guys are either certain or you are unsure and scarred to show any chinks in your thinking.

Interesting days ahead

You think people in the south and contributors here are just listening/reading Irish media?

Oh dear.
Nobody in the EU is breaking ranks this morning on this, but downcow sees chinks and possibilities.

Of course May will be received cordially, they won't embarrass her but there is no sign, not a single one of negotiations reopening.

Gwanoman

downcow wrote: »

I am only dipping in to roi media and news programmes but looking from outside roi they seem to be doing you a disservice. It seems they are currently just mouthpieces for government. They are speaking as one voice. They seem afraid to even mention the possibility of negotiations opening, which suggests to me they and the politicians know rightly that more negotiations are a real possibility.
British media is discussing all possibilities
For a moment forget how certain you are that negotiations are over. Can you not see what I am saying about the politicians and media supporting each other (and indeed you guys on here)?

All these phrases like liers etc being used for TM etc for suggesting that negotiations may open again on backstpp. Will you guys call your politicians and Eu politicians liers etc, if backstop is amended??

I am honest enough to say I ‘think’ the backstop will be amended. Of course I am not certain. You guys are either certain or you are unsure and scarred to show any chinks in your thinking.

Interesting days ahead

A post with no substance at all which perfectly sums up all of the problems the UK has with Brexit... The main problem is that the UK just dont want to follow the rules as laid out in all of the international treaties they signed up to...

VinLieger

downcow wrote: »

I am only dipping in to roi media and news programmes but looking from outside roi they seem to be doing you a disservice. It seems they are currently just mouthpieces for government. They are speaking as one voice. They seem afraid to even mention the possibility of negotiations opening, which suggests to me they and the politicians know rightly that more negotiations are a real possibility.
British media is discussing all possibilities
For a moment forget how certain you are that negotiations are over. Can you not see what I am saying about the politicians and media supporting each other (and indeed you guys on here)?

All these phrases like liers etc being used for TM etc for suggesting that negotiations may open again on backstpp. Will you guys call your politicians and Eu politicians liers etc, if backstop is amended??

I am honest enough to say I ‘think’ the backstop will be amended. Of course I am not certain. You guys are either certain or you are unsure and scarred to show any chinks in your thinking.

Interesting days ahead

Maybe stop dipping into the the Irish media and start looking at the global reaction to the stunts being pulled in the UK, ill bet the majority is not much different to what you see in Ireland. That's what we are all doing as well btw nobody on here is just reading RTE and taking what they say as gospel unlike you apparently with your parroting of the standard daily mail/express talking points.


When Negotiations don't reopen will you agree you've been talking out of your arse?

Macy0161

downcow wrote: »

All these phrases like liers etc being used for TM etc for suggesting that negotiations may open again on backstpp. Will you guys call your politicians and Eu politicians liers etc, if backstop is amended??

The EU and Irish Politicians have been clear that the only room for renegotiation is the removal of the UK's red lines. They haven't said no renegtiation at all, they have just said that no renegotiation of the WA on the current UK red lines.

I think you're a bit delusional on the UK media. I watched and listened to UK coverage for several hours yesterday from lunchtime (Radio 4, 5 Live, BBC News Channel, Newsnight) I heard two voices calling out the Brady motion as a nonsense. One Welsh Tory on The World at One, and Fiona Mitchell on Newsnight. All day long Tories were allowed get away with the Brady Motion as giving a clear way forward by the BBC, when it doesn't offer any solution or alternative.

BBC Journalists spent all day feeding the whole EU/ Ireland panicking, up to Maitlis being put back in her box last night. A Belgian MEP did the same on "Today" this morning - quite explicitly saying that damaging the single market through some fudge on the backstop was more of a concern to the EU than the damage of a No Deal Brexit. The UK media have completely brought into the Brexiter BS that "they need us more than we need them".

VinLieger

Skelet0n wrote: »

https://www.bbc.com/news/business-47036119

US firms seek changes to UK standards on beef and drugs

They stand no chance negotiating against the US, how they don't see this is beyond me. Terrifying.

I bet Downcow can't wait to get a tasted of that chlorinated chicken.


Its really quite sad to see them think they have any chance of standing up to the US on these issues.

Peregrinus

downcow wrote: »

I am only dipping in to roi media and news programmes but looking from outside roi they seem to be doing you a disservice. It seems they are currently just mouthpieces for government. They are speaking as one voice. They seem afraid to even mention the possibility of negotiations opening, which suggests to me they and the politicians know rightly that more negotiations are a real possibility.
British media is discussing all possibilities
For a moment forget how certain you are that negotiations are over. Can you not see what I am saying about the politicians and media supporting each other (and indeed you guys on here)?

All these phrases like liers etc being used for TM etc for suggesting that negotiations may open again on backstpp. Will you guys call your politicians and Eu politicians liers etc, if backstop is amended??

I am honest enough to say I ‘think’ the backstop will be amended. Of course I am not certain. You guys are either certain or you are unsure and scarred to show any chinks in your thinking.

Interesting days ahead

All the observers of the Brussels scene, and the correspondents in the various European capitals, are reporting the same thing; the EU view, that the Wthdrawal Agreement will not be opened up for renegotiation, enjoys impressive unanimity among the member states. Even European politicians who have previously urged concessions towards the UK are saying the opposite now.

Yes, they could all be "unsure and scared to show any chinks". Or they could just be reporting the reality they observe.

As for the British media, some are hailing May's acheivement in united the Tory party around an (undefined) alternative to the backstop. And some are saying that this gives her a "madate" to go back to the EU and seek changes. (Although, lets be honest, the mandate would be a bit stronger if the Brady resolution actually offered an alternative to the backstop, rather than just demanding one.) But none, that I can see, are suggesting that the EU is likely to agree to renegotiate, or offering any analysis in which it would be in the EU's interests to do so.

The EU will most likely reaffirm the terms of the Withdrawal Agreement, but offer tweaks in the Political Declaration which aim to provide greatere reassurance to the the UK (that, e.g., the backstop will not be used to "trap" the UK in a permanent customs union) while not overriding or detracting from what the Withdrawal Agreement provides. That's the best that May can hope for.

First Up

Zubeneschamali wrote:

I think the EU should stick to repeating yesterday's statements - the deal is on the table. Most MPs signalled that they don't want No Deal - fine, let them sort it out.

UK parliament unanimously agrees that it wants something else.

Says it all really.

ancapailldorcha

May must be playing for time. She knows she can't renegotiate her deal but this is a useful way to wait for the clock to run out so she can spring the deal in an ultimatum at the eleventh hour. No MP wants to be considered responsible for a no deal Brexit. It could also be a way to tie Labour to it as well if they vote it down again. Then again, 230 votes is a hell of a margin to overcome.

Speaking of no deal, I was chatting to the chap I know in DoIT last night. He's fairly convinced that no deal wouldn't be the disaster that the newspapers are predicting. He reckons that a lot of preparations have been made to limit the damage by the government. Of course, this comes with the Minford plan of abolishing tariffs which would mean sacrificing British manufacturing and agriculture. Can't see the Tory voting farmers of the Home Counties being too keen on that to say nothing of their subsidies that Michael Gove promised would be maintained for a few more years yet. I'm not sure what would happen regarding the customs checks at the border. Apparently, WTO rules regulate customs but do not necessitate them.

Beechwoodspark

As for the DUP - their written and verbal statements the last few days show that they are doing their best to cajole the Irish govt to react to their barely veiled insults - all the better to boast to their hardcore that they are putting the boot into Dublin.

Risible and reckless stuff.

VinLieger

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

Speaking of no deal, I was chatting to the chap I know in DoIT last night. He's fairly convinced that no deal wouldn't be the disaster that the newspapers are predicting. He reckons that a lot of preparations have been made to limit the damage by the government. Of course, this comes with the Minford plan of abolishing tariffs which would mean sacrificing British manufacturing and agriculture. Can't see the Tory voting farmers of the Home Counties being too keen on that to say nothing of their subsidies that Michael Gove promised would be maintained for a few more years yet. I'm not sure what would happen regarding the customs checks at the border. Apparently, WTO rules regulate customs but do not necessitate them.

That's all well and good for inbound freight but anything going out to the EU will need to go through customs and checks on the EU side creating delays to stuff getting out of the UK as the UK no longer have signed up to all the EU's regulations.

otnomart

OK this is the first time I see someone spelling out what the EU could trade with the backstop:

"Speaking late Tuesday to broadcaster Deutsche Welle, Manfred Weber, the favorite to succeed Juncker after this year's European parliamentary election, said that if May seeks to reopen negotiations on the Withdrawal Agreement, then “everything is reopened ... We talk again about Gibraltar, we talk again about the fisheries policies, we talk again about how much Great Britain must pay when they are leaving the EU."

So something for Spain and/or France, or more money for everybody.

Source: https://www.politico.eu/article/guy-verhofstadt-brexit-no-deal-breakthrough-depends-on-future-relationship/

Fr Tod Umptious

Macy0161 wrote: »

Could guess it was a clip from last nights Newsnight. So many things have been damaged by Brexit - for me, one of the lesser things is the quality of the BBC current affairs output. I watched the votes and aftermath on BBC News Channel, and Maitlis wasn't alone. The first one to call out the Brady Motion as having no content and things being no clearer was actually Fiona Mitchell on Newsnight. Not that she or the other guest got much room to talk as Maitlis let Digby Jones run roughshod over the discussion.

More than once Digby Jones agreed with Fiona Mitchell that the Brady ammendment had no substance.

And Maitlis did tackle Jones on the old NHS bus thing.

With anything people will hear what they want to hear in any debate.

ancapailldorcha

VinLieger wrote: »

That's all well and good for inbound freight but anything going out to the EU will need to go through customs and checks on the EU side creating delays to stuff getting out of the UK as the UK no longer have signed up to all the EU's regulations.

In the short term the UK is replicating EU regulations. As regards customs and checks, I don't know.

If it happens, we'll just have to hope that enough has been stockpiled.