Brexit Discussion Thread VI

Bit cynical

Nate--IRL-- wrote: »

They can't say that, it isn't in their power to do so. It is for each individual state to decide.

It is within their power to protect EU citizens' rights within the UK.

Akrasia

Seth Brundle wrote: »

I would expect that the UK will see this as a form of Victory at the EU caving in to their demands.

This is going to weaken Mays position significantly and strengthen the Moggs and Farages and it makes a 2nd referendum less likely.

Poor call from the EU

Nate--IRL--

Bit cynical wrote: »

It is within their power to protect EU citizens' rights within the UK.

Apologies, I misread your initial post.

Nate

Akrasia

Bit cynical wrote: »

Still wrong I'm afraid. If you said that flights would be grounded between the UK and the EU you were wrong. Face up to it.

And the misplaced gloating has started....

Tell me how

_Puma_ wrote: »

Theresa Mays's "deal" was an olive branch by the EU27 to help TM galvonise the now increasing "Remain" vote into some sort half way house between Remain and not walking off a cliff, but in true Tory fashion, she only managed to further fragment her party.

There is nothing else that can be done for them. Best look away now as things will get ugly and anything that is uttered by the EU27 will be interpreted as a sign of weakness by the Brexiters. Let them at it, let them consume themselves, let them stare off the cliff and let them jump if needs be.

We should be entirely focused on preparing and managing the fallout from inside the EU27, as we see from todays commissions brexit preparation plans.

I disagree that it was an olive branch as such. I feel that it was the EU making the best of a bad situation while protecting the interests of the remaining 27 (as they should do) as much as possible.

Focusing on managing the fallout is effectively saying that a hard border is required on the island of Ireland. That is not in our interest.

Podge_irl

Bit cynical wrote: »

Officially yes, but behind the scenes there will have been confidential discussions and arrangements.

The announcement is the closest thing you will see diplomatically to "we'll allow them this once, but the idiots better get their stuff sorted soon". I do not know what about the UK's approach makes you think they would in any way have the capability or desire to engage in such arrangements. This is the EU's contingency plan - the same plan that the UK has only just started to actually look at properly.

It is even noted in the document that "This is subject to the UK conferring equivalent rights to EU air carriers, as well as the UK ensuring conditions of fair competition." Nothing has been arranged or agreed with the UK.

Bit cynical

Podge_irl wrote: »

It is even noted in the document that "This is subject to the UK conferring equivalent rights to EU air carriers, as well as the UK ensuring conditions of fair competition." Nothing has been arranged or agreed with the UK.

I would say that a public statement from the UK will be forthcoming shortly.

ilovesmybrick

LeinsterDub wrote:

No special status for Northern Ireland! So how our all our special statuses coming along!

Ah look, we're all well aware over here what the DUP are like. However it looks like it's a steep learning curve for the UK government to realise what happens in their own jurisdiction. Are you really surprised that the DUP are full of that level of hypocrisy!

lawred2

ilovesmybrick wrote: »

Ah look, we're all well aware over here what the DUP are like. However it looks like it's a steep learning curve for the UK government to realise what happens in their own jurisdiction. Are you really surprised that the DUP are full of that level of hypocrisy!

Interesting to see how the DUP react to the cessation of CAP payments..

intellectual dosser

cml387 wrote: »

UK airlines will lose fifth freedom rights however. They would not be allowed to operate between EU airports.

Just between EU airports? Would the British Airways flight from London City to New York that stops in Shannon be impacted?

1st dalkey dalkey

"Just between EU airports? Would the British Airways flight from London City to New York that stops in Shannon be impacted?"

I don't think so. Unless they tried to pick up passengers in Shannon.

They can overfly, land and deliver passengers, but not pick up passengers.

1st dalkey dalkey

1st dalkey dalkey wrote: »

"Just between EU airports? Would the British Airways flight from London City to New York that stops in Shannon be impacted?"

I don't think so. Unless they tried to pick up passengers in Shannon.

They can overfly, land and deliver passengers, but not pick up passengers.

Sorry, may be wrong on that.
They can't operate within the EU i.e. an EU airport to another EU airport.
Not sure what the situation is for picking up from a EU airport to a third countryi.e. one that is neither EU nor UK.

1st dalkey dalkey

I see that there has been some kind of agreement on freight crossing each others territory.
Once sealed it will not be subject to further customs check.

But there has been no agreement on any special treatment for sealed truck at Dover.
In fact the UK government has apparently pre-booked space on ferries from Dover for its own providers.

This will impact our 'landbridge', leading to huge queues and long waits.

Yet our own ferry company, ICG (Irish Ferries), has decided to remove their ferry from Rosslare and operate from Dublin to France instead, a much longer crossing.
Wonder what drove that decision.

Podge_irl

1st dalkey dalkey wrote: »

Yet our own ferry company, ICG (Irish Ferries), has decided to remove their ferry from Rosslare and operate from Dublin to France instead, a much longer crossing.
Wonder what drove that decision.

Dublin being a much larger freight port I would guess?

fash

downcow wrote: »

Maybe an honest analysis of what checks are currently happening where and how these could be developed on all 4 sites with real sensitivity to those who feel their cultures and identity are deeply untwined in these borders ie unionists and nationalists on this island. Rather than the current we only care about nationalists which inevitably creates a we only care about unionists attitude on other side.
It has been very badly handled by both sides
I think a referendum up in north would now go basically orange and green which was not the case.

Barnier asked Raab for that information- Raab promised to provide it and then didn't ...- despite reminders.

Enzokk

I see that many didn't read or listen to the speech that Sir Ivan Rogers made and that has been linked twice already on here, on the RTE Brexit Republic podcast and printed as well.

He laid out it seemingly exactly what has happened with the arrangements the EU has set out in case of no-deal.

Sir Ivan Rogers wrote:

The reality is that if the deal on the table falls apart because we have said “no”, there will not be some smooth rapid suite of mini side deals – from aviation to fisheries, from road haulage to data, from derivatives to customs and veterinary checks, from medicines to financial services, as the EU affably sits down with this Prime Minister or another one.

The 27 will legislate and institute unilaterally temporary arrangements which assure continuity where they need it, and cause us asymmetric difficulties where they can. And a UK Government, which knows the efficacy of most of its contingency planning depends, to a greater or lesser degree on others’ actions out of its control, will then have to react – no doubt with a mixture of inevitable compliance and bellicose retaliation.

I will confess I only listened to the speech this evening so I only picked it up now but it seems that this is what has happened and it is not as some fear some capitulation to the UK. That would be our worse fear but seeing as this speech was made about a week ago you cannot say this was done or said with the benefit of hindsight.

Full speech: Sir Ivan Rogers on Brexit

RTÉ - Brexit Republic

Leroy42

It is not so much that I think it is a cave in to the UK, I understand (or at least think I do!) the reasons behind it.

What it does do, IMO, is show that the EU is indeed willing to bend when it suits them, that all things are possible if the price is right/costs are enough. I fear that it will simply embolden the Brexiteers in the UK, who will see such measures, as they have in all previous cases, as a weaknesses to be exploited.

Thus the likes of IDS, JRM etc can claim that they were right that the EU will not carry through on the threat of allowing UK to leave without a deal as the chaos would simply be too much for the EU to handle. As such, the UK simply needs to hold fast and wait for the inevitable last minute negotiations and agreement.

prawnsambo

1st dalkey dalkey wrote: »

I see that there has been some kind of agreement on freight crossing each others territory.
Once sealed it will not be subject to further customs check.

But there has been no agreement on any special treatment for sealed truck at Dover.
In fact the UK government has apparently pre-booked space on ferries from Dover for its own providers.

This will impact our 'landbridge', leading to huge queues and long waits.

Yet our own ferry company, ICG (Irish Ferries), has decided to remove their ferry from Rosslare and operate from Dublin to France instead, a much longer crossing.
Wonder what drove that decision.

Firstly, that's passengers and a small amount of Ro-Ro frsight. The majoritty of Ro-Ro freight will go from Dublin to Zeebrugge/Rotterdam/Amsterdam. Containers also, I presume. Some stuff may go landbridge, but I'd say a lot of freight companies will be steering well clear of that until the dust settles. Irish Ferries also have a number of other problems with damage to one ship, delayed delivery of a new one and have taken this step temporarily as I understand it.

brickster69

So the EU have caved on Derivatives ! Surprise surprise.

They left it late because in the next few days the City would of had to give 3 months notice to transfer all positions and the EU take them on themselves.

Aside from obviously having to rewrite millions of new contracts ( very expensive ) where would they go ???????????

Kick the can down the road all they want but eventually they will accept they need access to the City

Christy42

Bit cynical wrote: »

Christy42 wrote: »

Note that citizen rights are directly dependent on the UK reciprocating.

Well I think the UK have already said that EU citizens rights will be protected in the event of no deal some time ago.

"Nothing is decided until everything is decided".

They also made claims to want to avoid a border and yet have put every piece of bull in the way of that. This gives a bit of security to EU citizens in the UK to sort out their plans if no deal happens.

Nody

brickster69 wrote: »

Kick the can down the road all they want but eventually they will accept they need access to the City

No, all they need is for the existing derivatives to be cleared out and the new once opened in the relevant European legal entities that the banks have opened already. You appear to have missed the part were UK entities will not be allowed to sell any new products into EU; i.e. no new derivatives and EU will allow derivatives to be transferred from UK to a relevant EU regulated entity instead. That's exactly done to ensure minimal disruption while at the same time shutting down the derivative trade for EU countries in London; exactly the opposite of what your conclusion is.

Leroy42

brickster69 wrote: »

So the EU have caved on Derivatives ! Surprise surprise.

They left it late because in the next few days the City would of had to give 3 months notice to transfer all positions and the EU take them on themselves.

Aside from obviously having to rewrite millions of new contracts ( very expensive ) where would they go ???????????

Kick the can down the road all they want but eventually they will accept they need access to the City

But doesn't this mean that the UK have to continue to abide by the regulations are set by the EU? So really the only thing that has changed is that the UK has lost its voice and the EU is giving itself time to prepare for the full takeover of the area.

Enzokk

Leroy42 wrote: »

It is not so much that I think it is a cave in to the UK, I understand (or at least think I do!) the reasons behind it.

What it does do, IMO, is show that the EU is indeed willing to bend when it suits them, that all things are possible if the price is right/costs are enough. I fear that it will simply embolden the Brexiteers in the UK, who will see such measures, as they have in all previous cases, as a weaknesses to be exploited.

Thus the likes of IDS, JRM etc can claim that they were right that the EU will not carry through on the threat of allowing UK to leave without a deal as the chaos would simply be too much for the EU to handle. As such, the UK simply needs to hold fast and wait for the inevitable last minute negotiations and agreement.

Sure that is very much something that can happen, but if you read what Ivan Rogers has to say about that as well you will see it will just end badly for the UK as they haven't learned their lessons in that case,

The “no deal + “ fantasy is that if we just had the guts to walk away, refuse to sign the Withdrawal Agreement with the backstop in it, and withhold a good half of the money the Prime Minister promised this time last year, capitals, suddenly realising we were serious, would come running for a series of mini deals which assured full trading continuity in all key sectors on basically unchanged Single Market and Customs Union terms.

I don’t know what tablets these people are taking, but I must confess I wish I were on them. It will be said of them as it was said of the Bourbons, I think: “they have learned nothing and they have forgotten nothing”.

The reality is that if the deal on the table falls apart because we have said “no”, there will not be some smooth rapid suite of mini side deals – from aviation to fisheries, from road haulage to data, from derivatives to customs and veterinary checks, from medicines to financial services, as the EU affably sits down with this Prime Minister or another one.

The 27 will legislate and institute unilaterally temporary arrangements which assure continuity where they need it, and cause us asymmetric difficulties where they can. And a UK Government, which knows the efficacy of most of its contingency planning depends, to a greater or lesser degree on others’ actions out of its control, will then have to react – no doubt with a mixture of inevitable compliance and bellicose retaliation.

We already see the next generation of fantasies out there, and it’s now just a matter of time before a Tory leadership contender offers them publicly as the Houdini act.

A suite of very rapid legal mini deals, accompanied by the existing Withdrawal Agreement deal on citizen’ rights, the complete dropping of the backstop, and only paying the remainder of the 39billion cheque when the mini deals have turned into the miraculous Canada (with lots of pluses) deal.

All of which must happen in months. But of course…

To which the EU answer will be a calm but clear “Dream on. You still want a transition? All existing terms and conditions apply. And when it comes to any FTA – deep or shallower – “nothing is agreed till everything is agreed” – and that still includes the fish”.

They may put it slightly more politely. But not much, in the circumstances.

And to anyone who tells me – and we’ll hear plenty of it in the coming weeks, I assure you – “but the EU stands to lose access to London’s capital markets and their companies will suffer unless they do our quick and dirty “no deal” deal”, I think I would just say “even the last 30 months have evidently still not taught you how the EU functions: try again in another 30…”,

If we lurch, despite Parliament wishing to avoid it, towards a “no deal”, with delusions it can be “managed” into a quick and dirty FTA, that will not end happily or quickly.

The end game is much the same whatever they promise or say to the UK people. The whole speech is about politicians needing to be open and honest to the people on what withdrawing from the EU will be like. Telling people more lies and fantasies is not something the EU can control but the EU still needs to ensure that the chaos is managed for their members. If this means temporary deals then that is what they will strive for. What the UK makes of that is out of their control.

brickster69 wrote: »

So the EU have caved on Derivatives ! Surprise surprise.

They left it late because in the next few days the City would of had to give 3 months notice to transfer all positions and the EU take them on themselves.

Aside from obviously having to rewrite millions of new contracts ( very expensive ) where would they go ???????????

Kick the can down the road all they want but eventually they will accept they need access to the City

And now the City will have one year and 3 months to do all they need to because if the UK leaves without a deal in March 2019 then that gives institutions the time to start the preparations they need to as there will not be a deal with the UK after this.

You could be right to think they will continue this in perpetuity but the EU will want clarity for their members as well.

The latest measures fall far short of the “managed no-deal” or mini-deals that Brexit supporters hoped for. The measures “will be temporary in nature, limited in scope and adopted unilaterally by the EU”, the commission said, to underscore it would make decisions in the EU’s interests.

Measures include:

British airlines would have the right to fly point to point, eg London to Paris and back, but would lose rights to fly between EU airports.
EU banks and financial institutions can continue to clear derivatives in London for one year, a step described by the City of London corporation as “vital clarity”, while it lamented the absence of steps to address the “significant risks to data transfers” and protect other contracts.
In a softening of approach following pressure from EU governments, British trucks can continue bringing goods into the EU until the end of 2019, as long as the UK grants equivalent rights to EU lorry drivers.
The emergency plans will not apply to the British overseas territory of Gibraltar, reflecting the limited nature of the measures, which are done to secure EU interests.

No deal threatens 1m Britons' EU residence rights, commission says

RobMc59

Podge_irl wrote: »

The announcement is the closest thing you will see diplomatically to "we'll allow them this once, but the idiots better get their stuff sorted soon". I do not know what about the UK's approach makes you think they would in any way have the capability or desire to engage in such arrangements. This is the EU's contingency plan - the same plan that the UK has only just started to actually look at properly.

It is even noted in the document that "This is subject to the UK conferring equivalent rights to EU air carriers, as well as the UK ensuring conditions of fair competition." Nothing has been arranged or agreed with the UK.

I think you`re a deluded as theresa may:rolleyes:-it`s negotiation which is in the interests of both parties-purely business-what are you trying to suggest?

Christy42

Nody wrote: »

brickster69 wrote: »

Kick the can down the road all they want but eventually they will accept they need access to the City

No, all they need is for the existing derivatives to be cleared out and the new once opened in the relevant European legal entities that the banks have opened already. You appear to have missed the part were UK entities will not be allowed to sell any new products into EU; i.e. no new derivatives and EU will allow derivatives to be transferred from UK to a relevant EU regulated entity instead. That's exactly done to ensure minimal disruption while at the same time shutting down the derivative trade for EU countries in London; exactly the opposite of what your conclusion is.

Honestly even if everything the poster was saying was true. That the EU desperately needs derivatives in London. It means that the UK have nothing to show for their greatest Trump cards except their aeroplanes are allowed land. If anything the EU is having their cake and eating it with this as they only take what they want from this declaration.

And that is taking the pro Brexiter's word as gospel that makes it a great move. They get nothing else in the financial space, just what the EU wanted apparently.

Podge_irl

RobMc59 wrote: »

I think you`re a deluded as theresa may:rolleyes:-it`s negotiation which is in the interests of both parties-purely business-what are you trying to suggest?

I'm suggesting the UK is not remotely competent enough or advanced enough in their preparations to have negotiated any of this with the EU and that it is a purely unilateral move.

prawnsambo

RobMc59 wrote: »

I think you`re a deluded as theresa may:rolleyes:-it`s negotiation which is in the interests of both parties-purely business-what are you trying to suggest?

So instead of both legs being chopped off, only one is, with a stay of execution on the other. Not sure how you can spin this as some kind of advantage for the UK.

An Claidheamh

Phonehead wrote: »

You clearly haven't done any research or read/listened to any analysis on the consequences of a full Brexit crash out. Yes Ireland will suffer but the UK will suffer catastrophically. I don't believe you are a genuine contributor to this conversation if I'm honest. You've ignored all well thought out responses to your nonsense and still best the same drum

That message pretty much sums up Brexiteers.

Well that and the delusion.

RobMc59

prawnsambo wrote: »

So instead of both legs being chopped off, only one is, with a stay of execution on the other. Not sure how you can spin this as some kind of advantage for the UK.

I think it`s a negotiation between two parties-I never suggested it was an advantage for anyone .If there was any spinning it certainly was`nt by me.

prawnsambo

RobMc59 wrote: »

I think it`s a negotiation between two parties-I never suggested it was an advantage for anyone .If there was any spinning it certainly was`nt by me.

Well if that's the result of a negotiation, you'd really need to fire the UK negotiators.