Brexit discussion thread VII (Please read OP before posting)

Spanish Eyes

BobbyBobberson wrote: »

https://twitter.com/katyballs/status/1098004050484883456

I imagine this talk is just to try and keep those about to resign the whip placated for a few more days. Also as everyone knows, what Westminster thinks isnt in line with Brussels, most of the time.

As you say, if the EU are not prepared to agree to any more shenanigans on the backstop, what is the point? Unless UK is going to agree to a full non time limited backstop as originally agreed, before May reneged.

eire4

Akrasia wrote: »

In other sports related news, the Heineken Cup quarter finals are on the 30th and 31st of March

Will there be
Broadcast rights, work permits, flights, customs clearance for the travelling teams sports equipment etc etc...

There are a lot of southern hemisphere born players who have rights to work in the EU but will they have to apply for work permits to play in the UK post Brexit?

Good point. Their precious epl will be deeply affected as well as now all those French German, etc players playing there will now also all be foreigners and their teams are loaded with players from all over the EU. Just another one of the million and one things that will have to be addressed post brexit.

Calina

Bit cynical wrote: »

This is the main threat that Theresa May has against the hard Brexiteers: "agree to my deal or we extend article 50". As far as I'm aware she does not require any parliamentary approval to do this.

Ireland is probably in favour of an extension particularly if there is to be no deal as we are not yet prepared for that scenario.

The UK has a large body of legislation required to support Brexit. They aren't even close to completion. They cannot get it done in time. At all.

They will need an extension just to do their own administration.

But the extension requires the approval of all 27 other members. I am assuming that if the Commission is signalling the possibility, they are fairly sure this is possible.

But I suspect they are doing so in order to enable an orderly wind down which requires the UK to sort out the other ancillary legislation, not to give more time for brinkmanship. I just fear it will be used for brinkmanship. As the UK government has folded on the WA and is now looking for a codicil - which they will not get if they are looking to contradict the text of the agreement - I suspect a civil servant has got this message through to May whatever about the rest of her party.

My guess is an extension will only be requested if the WA is approved in a reasonably timely manner - this does not mean 27 March.

If it is not, the cliffhanger will possibly be between no deal and withdrawal of Article 50. This has been alluded to earlier with implied threats that if there was no deal approved by HoC, there might be no Brexit. The issue there is that withdrawal of Article 50 in bad faith or just to manipulate the HoC would not make many friends.

The other problem now is that a late reversal of Article 50 does not reverse things like Honda's decision, for example. The losses caused by a potential (even with deal) Brexit, directly or indirectly, are real losses, even if Brexit does not ultimately happen. The last two years have been toxic for business.

Socially, the country is very, very deeply divided. In a way, the country has been fighting a more or less bloodless civil war, and the entrenched views and disruption to personal relationships will probably take a generation to filter out, if not longer. It does not have a single political leader with the charisma to look at the actual problems for the population and both parties are driven by desired ideological processes, not be desired outcomes. Additionally, there is a very deep lack of willing on the Brexit supporting side to consider any give at all. They use the language of abuse: enemies of the state, traitors, and a heavy focus on reminding people they lost.

You don't build the phoenix of conciliation out of that and in particular as a good chunk of Brexit voters won't get what they want even if Brexit goes ahead it will be hard to even try.

The next 5 years will be interesting.

murphaph

FrancieBrady wrote: »

I want the people who conned them to have consequences. Old people living their days out in the sun...not so much. They made a mistake they are admitting to at least.

No sympathy for any leave voter enjoying the benefits of FoM wanting to pull up the ladder and deny those benefits to future generations. They are the very worst example of hypocrites.

Zubeneschamali

Bit cynical wrote: »

Theresa May has said that there will be no extension

We all know there isn't enough time to pass the laws needed for a no-deal Brexit.


So either this is not true, or she is planning that Westminster will fold and pass the WA.

Peregrinus

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

We all know there isn't enough time to pass the laws needed for a no-deal Brexit.


So either this is not true, or she is planning that Westminster will fold and pass the WA.

EVen if Parliament votes to accept the WA, there is still substantial legislation that needs to pass in order to implement it. So, yeah, she definitely needs an extension to do what she wants to do.

But she's currently not asking for it and, I think, is denying that she plans to. The reason for this is twofold.

First, domestically, talk of extensions reduces the "impending disaster" pressure that she is relying on to get people to swing behind her deal.

Secondly, vis-a-vis the EU, talk of extensions opens the door to the EU making requests or setting conditions to the grant of an extension, or even invites the possiblity that some member states might outright oppose it. Whereas if she waits until Parliament has approved the WA before asking, at that point she can be pretty much assured of a favourable response to the request.

Ironically, a no-deal Brexit doesn't need any laws passed in the UK. With or without new legislation, no-deal Brexit is the default outcome which will happen on 29 March if the UK fails to choose anything else.

Of course, the failure to legislate for the consequences of no-deal will make no-deal even more chaotic and destructive than it needs to be. But that suits May's purpose quite well; the more horrible no-deal is going to be, the more highly motivated MPs will be to swallow their pride and abjure their fantasies, and vote for the WA on offer.

Zubeneschamali

Spanish Eyes wrote: »

I am not sure if withdrawal of A50 needs Commons approval though.

It does. They already passed a law saying the UK leaves the EU on Brexit day. They need to have a vote to repeal that law (although I think a Ministerial Order could change the date - maybe enough for an extension).



In addition, A50 has to be handled "according to the Constitutional requirements" of the country leaving. This is interpreted as meaning the HoC would have to vote for at least a motion if not a law to withdraw it.

Seth Brundle

Apparently May won't extend Art 50. This may just be her not giving an option before WM voters on the WA again.
Or not?!?!

https://twitter.com/irishexaminer/status/1098094491435712513?s=19

woohoo!!!

The EU will give a 6 week time extension without any hassle, 3 months if the UK looks like it can agree the WA. They're a pain for sure but politically the EU can live with more short term annoyance, and keep serving the ball back to the UK.

Peregrinus

First Up wrote: »

Haha

Its the Premiership without its contingent of European players and managers I look forward to.

Edit;
I see this point already made by others.

Um.

It's true that EU law on Freedom of Movement, combined with EU antidiscrimination law, led to the "internationalisation" of top-flight soccer in the UK. But it doesn't follow that this will be reversed as a result of Brexit. Brexit will allow, but not require, the Football Association to re-impose the quotas they had that limited non-English players. Given the business model of the Premier League, I think it's wildly unlikely that quotas of that kind will be reimposed.

Players and coaches from the EU-27 will, of course, require visas/work permits after Brexit to take positions with English clubs. But there are suitable high-skills visas available, and the clubs will be highly motivated to do the paperwork necessary to obtain them. They already do this for non-EU players and coaches.

What might be hit is the recruitment of promising juveniles into the clubs' football academies. They won't qualify for high-skills visas so easily, since they won't have the record of attainment and acclaim that an established star can point to. Plus - and this is probably a bigger factor - FIFA discourages the international recruitment of juvenile players - it tends to poach footballing talent from poorer countries to wealthier ones. There's an exception to allow it between EU countries, but of course the UK won't be able to avail of this exception after Brexit day.

Another issues is of course that the weaker pound makes it more difficult for English clubs in bidding against EU clubs for the same talent. (It's reportedly already the case that star foreign players being approached by English clubs are negotiating for contracts with remuneration denominated in euros so that the club, and not the player, bears the risk of further declines in sterling.) By the same token foreign clubs will find it easier to outbid English clubs to attract talent away.

Russman

First Up wrote: »

Haha

Its the Premiership without its contingent of European players and managers I look forward to.

Edit;
I see this point already made by others.

The death knell of Sky Sports too if that ever happened. Imagine the loss of subscriptions almost overnight.

The contracts situation would be a mess too, imagine Carlos Kickaball (remember Alan Sugar !) who’s on €300k a week for 4 years being told he now needs a work permit, but he hasn’t played the required number of internationals so can’t get one. And the club owners trying to pay the wages with no TV money coming in. Pretty soon no champions league spots for 3rd & 4th place.

Actually I’ve no idea if there’s been any statements or arrangements made for sports and the like, there could well have been.

Apologies Mods for being slightly OT, it’s a fascinating potential side effect, albeit not very relevant to the average Joe who’s more likely to be worried about putting food on the table if they crash out on 29th.

ilovesmybrick

https://twitter.com/Peston/status/1098128322553364480

Any idea what time PMQ's are today? Apparently (according to the Guardian live feed) if they're going to defect it will be before then.

First Up

The irony being that Joe the Plumber voted for Brexit to keep out his Polish competitor, before going to cheer for his favourite team laden with Spaniards, French, Germans and the rest.

Who represents the budding English players consigned to the lower divisions as a result?

CelticRambler

First Up wrote: »

The irony being that Joe the Plumber voted for Brexit to keep out his Polish competitor, before going to cheer for his favourite team laden with Spaniards, French, Germans and the rest.

John Oliver was similarly sarcastic about the infamous Brexit Box survival kit - containing Chile Con Carne, Chicken Tikka Masala and Falafels ... :rolleyes:

Meanwhile, it sounds like we'll get to see Tory diplomacy in action again today:

With the negotiations at an impasse, the foreign secretary, Jeremy Hunt, is expected to appeal to Brussels to help the UK come up with a solution during a visit to Berlin.

Hunt will say. “The stakes are just too high: we must all do what we can to ensure such a deal is reached. At this momentous time, a heavy responsibility falls upon all of us. We do not want historians in the future to puzzle over our actions and ask themselves how it was that Europe failed to achieve an amicable change in its relationship with Britain – a country that is not simply a partner but a friend and ally in every possible sense.”

Somehow, I don't think historians in the future will do too much puzzling about Europe's failure in this regard.

seamus

Peregrinus wrote: »

Players and coaches from the EU-27 will, of course, require visas/work permits after Brexit to take positions with English clubs. But there are suitable high-skills visas available, and the clubs will be highly motivated to do the paperwork necessary to obtain them. They already do this for non-EU players and coaches.

Yeah, virtually every country has an analogue of these. It's not a case of having to prove that no citizen is available to the job, you apply for an extraordinary visa on the basis that the individual has a talent which is of an exceptional and world-class nature.

This is how big musicians and actors travel the world and do gigs without being delayed by visa processes.

Schnitzler Hiyori Geta

woohoo!!! wrote: »

The EU will give a 6 week time extension without any hassle, 3 months if the UK looks like it can agree the WA. They're a pain for sure but politically the EU can live with more short term annoyance, and keep serving the ball back to the UK.

I don't think the EU can unilaterally extend the date.

Schnitzler Hiyori Geta

ilovesmybrick wrote: »

Any idea what time PMQ's are today? Apparently (according to the Guardian live feed) if they're going to defect it will be before then.

Noon

seamus

Schnitzler Hiyori Geta wrote: »

I don't think the EU can unilaterally extend the date.

Correct. Article 50 expressly states that the EU and the leaving country all have to agree.

There is nothing however stopping the EU from formally agreeing that an extension will be allowed and leaving it out there for the UK to grasp.

They won't, but they could.

They also won't agree to a 3 month extension. 7 weeks max. Any extension will not go beyond the EU elections.

Seth Brundle

May is visiting the EU today in the hopes that they can resolve the Backstop issue.
You'd think that she would first have run her plans by Leo though...

https://twitter.com/DarranMarshall/status/1098124183014461441

prawnsambo

seamus wrote: »

Correct. Article 50 expressly states that the EU and the leaving country all have to agree.

There is nothing however stopping the EU from formally agreeing that an extension will be allowed and leaving it out there for the UK to grasp.

They won't, but they could.

I think they'd have a problem setting the duration without a request though.

Peregrinus

seamus wrote: »

Yeah, virtually every country has an analogue of these. It's not a case of having to prove that no citizen is available to the job, you apply for an extraordinary visa on the basis that the individual has a talent which is of an exceptional and world-class nature.

This is how big musicians and actors travel the world and do gigs without being delayed by visa processes.

Actually, they do get delayed by visa processes, sometimes. They just rarely get completely stymied.

It's the not-yet-star and just-regular-craftsmen musicians and actors who encounter serious problems.

54and56

seamus wrote: »

They also won't agree to a 3 month extension. 7 weeks max. Any extension will not go beyond the EU elections.

I think they will on two conditions:-

1. That the reason for the extension is to give legislative effect to the WA.

2. That the extension completes before the newly elected MEP's sit for the first time which IIRC is July.

ArmaniJeanss

Peregrinus wrote: »

Um.

It's true that EU law on Freedom of Movement, combined with EU antidiscrimination law, led to the "internationalisation" of top-flight soccer in the UK. But it doesn't follow that this will be reversed as a result of Brexit. Brexit will allow, but not require, the Football Association to re-impose the quotas they had that limited non-English players. Given the business model of the Premier League, I think it's wildly unlikely that quotas of that kind will be reimposed.

Players and coaches from the EU-27 will, of course, require visas/work permits after Brexit to take positions with English clubs. But there are suitable high-skills visas available, and the clubs will be highly motivated to do the paperwork necessary to obtain them. They already do this for non-EU players and coaches.

Obviously the EPL won't bring in a rule which affects themselves adversely, and it's unlikely the government will do anything to make life more difficult for the football industry.

Where they are vulnerable is if UEFA or FIFA bring in a continent wide or worldwide rule to say insist on 8 or 9 home-nationality players on the pitch at any time. There are certain rules in place already (you often see a few academy players in squads to tick a few boxes) but nothing too onerous. But by the same token there's nothing to stop UEFA or FIFA making those rules harsher.

Being in the EU gave them good protection against the impact of such a rule change because FOM. Being outside the EU they'd have no such protection.

Hurrache

Pat O'Toole from the Farmers Journal was just on Pay Kenny talking about the story they're "breaking" on the tariffs we discussed yesterday to try aid UK farmers.

He didn't come across very knowledgeable about the whole back stop and trade to be honest, he was too excited to dramatise it as a disaster for Irish farmers, Pat couldn't even get a word in to clarify and correct a few things.

Peregrinus

ArmaniJeanss wrote: »

Obviously the EPL won't bring in a rule which affects themselves adversely, and it's unlikely the government will do anything to make life more difficult for the football industry.

Where they are vulnerable is if UEFA or FIFA bring in a continent wide or worldwide rule to say insist on 8 or 9 home-nationality players on the pitch at any time. There are certain rules in place already (you often see a few academy players in squads to tick a few boxes) but nothing too onerous. But by the same token there's nothing to stop UEFA or FIFA making those rules harsher.

Being in the EU gave them good protection against the impact of such a rule change because FOM. Being outside the EU they'd have no such protection.

FIFA or EUFA couldn't bring in such a rule and apply it to EU countries requiring them to discriminate against players from other EU countries. And bringing in such a rule but giving EU countries a carve-out with respect to players from other EU countries would be obviously unfair to non-EU countries. So I doubt that it will happen.

Zubeneschamali

prawnsambo wrote: »

I think they'd have a problem setting the duration without a request though.

Juncker is on record saying no-one will block an extension:

If Britain asks for a delay to its departure from the European Union, none of the existing members will stand in its way, European Commission President Jean-Claude Juncker said on Tuesday.
But, speaking at an event in the German city of Stuttgart, Juncker added that if the extension lasted until the European Parliament elections at the end of May, British voters would have to take part in the polls.

ArmaniJeanss

Peregrinus wrote: »

FIFA or EUFA couldn't bring in such a rule and apply it to EU countries requiring them to discriminate against players from other EU countries. And bringing in such a rule but giving EU countries a carve-out with respect to players from other EU countries would be obviously unfair to non-EU countries. So I doubt that it will happen.

But such rules/discriminations already exist as you yourself said with respect to U18 players. So Arsenal or Marseilles can currently sign a young player from a village in Bulgaria that CSKA Moscow wouldn't be allowed to sign. But Arsenal also won't be allowed sign him this time next year.
So the precedent is there in the rules already for FIFA to introduce clauses which are biased against non-EU.

Schnitzler Hiyori Geta

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

Juncker is on record saying no-one will block an extension:

If Britain asks for a delay to its departure from the European Union, none of the existing members will stand in its way, European Commission President Jean-Claude Juncker said on Tuesday.
But, speaking at an event in the German city of Stuttgart, Juncker added that if the extension lasted until the European Parliament elections at the end of May, British voters would have to take part in the polls.

Nobody has asked for an extension, someone is seeming to suggest that the EU would extend - which they wouldn't.

Leroy42

The key part being that the UK needs to request a delay.

TM has continued to state that there will be no delay. So she will have to make a decision, something she seems almost pathologically unable to do (and that is not just about Brexit, it was the view expressed by some before she took the role of PM).

To request a delay is actually quite a big step, far bigger politically than many on here seem to be be giving it. The discussion seems to be largely concerned with whether the EU would accede to such a request, which all the indicators suggest they will, but far more important, IMO, is the political impact in the UK.

Would TM be able to retain power if the single line she has been working on is shown to have failed (the length of time is irrelevant). How would it affect the standing of the Tories to have failed to deliver?

Schnitzler Hiyori Geta

Leroy42 wrote: »

The key part being that the UK needs to request a delay.

TM has continued to state that there will be no delay. So she will have to make a decision, something she seems almost pathologically unable to do (and that is not just about Brexit, it was the view expressed by some before she took the role of PM).

To request a delay is actually quite a big step, far ****** politically than many on here seem to be be giving it. The discussion seems to be largely concerned with whether the EU would accede to such a request, which all the indicators suggest they will, but far more important, IMO, is the political impact in the UK.

Would TM be able to retain power if the single line she has been working on is shown to have failed (the length of time is irrelevant). How would it affect the standing of the Tories to have failed to deliver?

The prevailing theory seems to be that May is driving the car to the cliff-edge and will seek a last-minute delay with some mega plan. Colour me sceptical, but this does seem to be why a delay is being discussed even thought May has repeatedly claimed she's not interested.