Brexit discussion thread VII (Please read OP before posting)

swampgas

Akrasia wrote: »

The 2nd referendum doesn't have to happen before A50 is revoked.

IMO, if the HOC votes to revoke A50, the only way they can sell this to the public is if they commit to holding another referendum within 12 months or so on the future of the UK's relationship to the EU.

They should use the time to do a proper citizens assembly style investigation into what the public preference actually is in relation to what the question on the referendum should be.

The problem (IMO) is that British political culture appears to have descended into toxic, zero-trust, confrontational, partisan winner-takes-all warfare where MPs seem happier shouting and heckling each other in parliament than doing anything constructive. They seem to have lost the language, the habits and the "political rituals" to make deals, build bridges, compromise, form coalitions and generally do the things that politicians the world over do perfectly naturally .

Even if many MPs seem to know that they're on a collision course with disaster, they don't seem to know how to get off the train.

prawnsambo

NIMAN wrote: »

How many forecasts in the last decade have been wrong?

Not sure how relevant that question is. It's a forecast. It's not going to be 100% accurate by definition.

Water John

UK doesn't have experience of coalitions and thus compromise.
They think it a strength, thus support for FPTP when in fact it's a democratic weakness.

road_high

Water John wrote: »

UK doesn't have experience of coalitions and thus compromise.
They think it a strength, thus support for FPTP when in fact it's a democratic weakness.

Well their approach to the EU is the exact same- all about getting one over and beating them as far as I can see

VinLieger

Tangatagamadda Chaddabinga Bonga Bungo wrote: »

Ireland is in big big trouble if there is a no deal Brexit. But there is literally no alternative so there is nothing we can do about it unfortunately.

Thankfully theres 26 other countries who have our back.

Bit cynical

Irishmale0399 wrote: »

Can we pay any EU government to refuse it.....get the mess over and done with.

Would it not be easier, if that were our aim, to simply oppose it ourselves?

reslfj

Tangatagamadda Chaddabinga Bonga Bungo wrote: »

Ireland is in big big trouble if there is a no deal Brexit. But there is literally no alternative so there is nothing we can do about it unfortunately.

But in relation to the EU27 Ireland has a small economy and basically only needs a replacement marked for its export to England. Scotland and Wales. This will happen with the EU's assistance.

Ireland has the full support of the the other EU27 members and can use both the well working SM and 40+ FTAs with other countries.

In case of a 'no deal' Brexit the NI will likely be the loser as tariffs must be collected to follow WTO rules.

Lars

Imreoir2

Bit cynical wrote: »

Would it not be easier, if that were our aim, to simply oppose it ourselves?

I took it to mean us the boards community through some sort of kickstarted campaign...

Bit cynical

Imreoir2 wrote: »

I took it to mean us the boards community through some sort of kickstarted campaign...

Ah OK. However we do have elected representatives charged with looking out or our interests. I'm not sure opposing an extension to A50 is a good idea but if I though it was I would want to know why Ireland would not oppose an extension.

road_high

reslfj wrote: »

But in relation to the EU27 Ireland has a small economy and basically only needs a replacement marked for its export to England. Scotland and Wales. This will happen with the EU's assistance.

Ireland has the full support of the the other EU27 members and can use both the well working SM and 40+ FTAs with other countries.

In case of a 'no deal' Brexit the NI will likely be the loser as tariffs must be collected to follow WTO rules.

Lars

Those continually threatening Ireland don't take any interest in what a globalised economy we are and how we've been working very hard to reduce and reduce our reliance on the UK as an export market. It would be a shame to lose any more UK trade but if that's the path they insist then so be it, we are well placed to re orientate further. These are the same idiots droning on about "global" Britain- funnily enough a little economy like ours is already well ahead of them in that score.

Strazdas

Water John wrote: »

UK doesn't have experience of coalitions and thus compromise.
They think it a strength, thus support for FPTP when in fact it's a democratic weakness.

Also, it's the first time in their history they've had to implement a referendum result that goes against the government and the parliament and which upends the status quo.

It predictably has turned into a catastrophe : the instruction from the referendum was so vague and open ended that they haven't a clue how to implement it and there are about four or five different factions disagreeing with each other.

It's almost astonishing that people didn't spot a Leave vote of any description would spark off a huge political and constitutional crisis. If Britain is a parliamentary democracy, then how can it find itself being overruled by an advisory referendum and being forced to crash the economy in the process and seemingly with no way out of the disaster.

liamtech

An Ciarraioch wrote: »

Anyone for another 21 months of Brexit?

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-02-24/eu-is-said-to-mull-idea-of-proposing-brexit-extension-to-2021

That would, in theory, allow time for a full General Election, and a full Referendum, or renegotiation by the new incumbent Government

Charles Babbage

Strazdas wrote: »

Also, it's the first time in their history they've had to implement a referendum result that goes against the government and the parliament and which upends the status quo.

It predictably has turned into a catastrophe : the instruction from the referendum was so vague and open ended that they haven't a clue how to implement it and there are about four or five different factions disagreeing with each other.

It's almost astonishing that people didn't spot a Leave vote of any description would spark off a huge political and constitutional crisis. If Britain is a parliamentary democracy, then how can it find itself being overruled by an advisory referendum and being forced to crash the economy in the process and seemingly with no way out of the disaster.

People did spot that there would be a huge crisis, they generally voted remain.

Frank Bullitt

Surely to god the EU would only agree to an extension if there was a legitimate reason to?

If they have said the deal right now is the only deal, and Parliament can't agree on that, then what would be the point?

Strazdas

Charles Babbage wrote: »

People did spot that there would be a huge crisis, they generally voted remain.

There was no sense at all though from June 23rd onward that Brexit might be virtually unimplementable and that the result would throw up numerous constitutional problems (ie. an advisory referendum overruling the sovereign parliament and forcing it to do things it didn't want to do and which it thought were damaging to the country).

Strazdas

Gintonious wrote: »

Surely to god the EU would only agree to an extension if there was a legitimate reason to?

If they have said the deal right now is the only deal, and Parliament can't agree on that, then what would be the point?

I would take the Guardian story with a pinch of salt. The UK will be very lucky to get even an eight week extension and even then only if a big change direction is afoot.

Silent Running

Akrasia wrote: »

I don't think the UK would vote to leave twice.

The brexiteers know that this is their only chance, they all vehemently oppose holding a 2nd referendum because they know that they only won the first referendum by staying vague and purposely not communicating what life outside the EU would actually be like.

The British public have had 3 years of insight into how damaging brexit actually is, and how clueless and incompetent the politicians who lead down this path actually are.

There are the hardcore brexiteers who will never change their mind, but they are a fixed number. There are an awful lot of people who didn't vote in the last referendum because they didn't take it seriously and there are an awful lot of people who voted leave to 'give the government a bloody nose' who realise that they were only shooting themselves in the foot, and there are a lot of voters who voted to leave because they believed the lies about funding for the NHS and that free trade agreements will be the easiest deals ever negotiated.

The Brexiteers are split between those who want the hardest possible brexit, and those who want Norway/Canada/Switzerland etc style arrangements while remainers are united under one single goal (to stop brexit and to preserve whatever relationship they have left with the EU27)

A 2nd referendum absolutely shouldn't be phrased the same as the first referendum. Any kind of nuance in the kind of brexit being offered in a 2nd referendum would split the Brexit vote in half.

I see the logic of your argument and agree with it. If we are viewing the debate based entirely on logic, all of the above makes absolute sense. But we have to include the emotional element.

The emotions seem to have been ignited in the UK. Now, I obviously haven't talked to them all in my visits to the UK, but those I talk to regularly look to have swerved from a reasonable argument to a more fanatical, flag waving, battle of Britain stance.

It's difficult to convey the sense of trench mentality they seem to feel now.

NIMAN

I couldn't take another 21 months of daily Brexit discussions.

They need to stop kicking the can, and sort it out now.

Schnitzler Hiyori Geta

liamtech wrote: »

That would, in theory, allow time for a full General Election, and a full Referendum, or renegotiation by the new incumbent Government

This would need to be a commitment to the EU for, in my view, the EU to accept an extension of this length. US looking likely to hit recession in 2020/21 and the knock-on impact from that might have a large impact on the UK's position in 2 years.

Leroy42

Strazdas wrote: »

I would take the Guardian story with a pinch of salt. The UK will be very lucky to get even an eight week extension and even then only if a big change direction is afoot.

My reading of it is that the EU is floating the idea to try and focus the UK minds.

At this stage it seems the UK seem to just assume that an extension will be given regardless, and for whatever time they want. If it wasn't for the pesky elections the EU would give them whatever time they wanted.

This is a shot across the bows to say that unless the extension is very specific (ie the deal is passed and they need more time to pass the legislation) then a delay comes with certain obligations.

Suddenly a delay is not the easy solution that the UK seem to think it is. As usual, it appears that the UK seem to think that the only consideration is what they want rather than how it effects everyone around them.

Sam Russell

My reading is that the EU are saying that a 21 month extension means that the WA is not needed - just stay part of the EU and negotiate a new WA that includes the trade agreement. Of course, it increases the chance that Art 50 would be revoked because the continuing uncertainty will bleed the UK economy further, for example Irish business will continue to bypass the UK wherever possible, and UK business will look to move business into the EU.

The result will be no different - there will still be a backstop, a payment of due money, and EU citizens rights to be guaranteed. That will be the starting point, and they may demand that the result is approved by another referendum, but I would not think that they could interfere with UK constitutional matters.

The UK would have to contest the EU Parliament elections - that could be interesting.

ilovesmybrick

I don't know if anyone's posted this already, but I just caught Coveney on Sophy Ridge yesterday morning link.

I think it's possibly the most frustrated and forceful I've seen him in a long time discussing Brexit. I think it's fair to say that he has done an excellent job at dealing with the mess coming out from Westminster without lowering himself down to the level of condescension that comes from some of his counterparts across the Irish sea, but it does seem in recent weeks to be beginning to give way to utter exasperation at what's happening.

Leroy42

Yeah, I saw that and he didn't do himself any favours with that interview. But I completely understand where he is coming from and I applaud him for maintaining his composure to the extent that he has.

But when you compare the type of questions thrown at him with the free ride given to Brexiteers such as IDS (and SKY are one of the better ones to hold them to account) I can totally understand the frustration.

IDS came out and said that any backstop was totally impracticable, could never be inacted, and nothing was said. No question as to why the PM is continuing with this policy and he continues to support her. No question about why, if the backstop was unworkable, was he so against it, so much so that he was willing to risk a no deal.

Why he stated that a no deal would cause serious problems for Ireland but continues to state that a no deal is no issue for the UK and actually WTO is grand.

IMO, Coveney et al such just stay away at this stage. They are not going to change anyones mind, they are not going to be able to get through to the UK at this point. Focus on domestic and EU issues (obviously Brexit is the biggest but I mean focus on what we can do, how best to prepare, talks with the EU about the future).

liamtech

Silent Running wrote: »

I see the logic of your argument and agree with it. If we are viewing the debate based entirely on logic, all of the above makes absolute sense. But we have to include the emotional element.

The emotions seem to have been ignited in the UK. Now, I obviously haven't talked to them all in my visits to the UK, but those I talk to regularly look to have swerved from a reasonable argument to a more fanatical, flag waving, battle of Britain stance.

It's difficult to convey the sense of trench mentality they seem to feel now.

Yea i agree with this. On so many interviews we see people who have been negatively effected, but are none the less determined to leave the EU. This would be my concern in a second referendum

That said, i still hope they get a peoples vote. At the very least, the facts are now fully known and the arguments would surely be

• The Good Friday agreement will not be effected at all
• there will not be a hard border
• we will give 350 million a week to the NHS
• We will be in Berlin the day after we leave signing Trade deals
• Everything the Remain Side is saying about the negative effect on Sterling, the economy, job losses, and companies leaving is fiction
• NO! We won fair and square, a second referendum is unfair and undemocratic, as it was not at all necessary to be honest during the first campaign

In all honesty if the UK still voted for Leave given these facts, then so be it

MrMusician18

liamtech wrote: »

That would, in theory, allow time for a full General Election, and a full Referendum, or renegotiation by the new incumbent Government

The Irish government would most likely quickly collapse if there was a 21 month extension.

Seth Brundle

Leroy42 wrote: »

IDS came out today on Sky news and basically threatened Ireland. Said we were be in serious trouble if no deal happened before going on to state that a backstop was even enforceable so pointless anyway.

Here is IDS on Sphhie Ridge yesterday.
His comments regarding Simon Coveney & Ireland mainly @ 10:00

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7rPZ04yAGu8

liamtech

MrMusician18 wrote: »

The Irish government would most likely quickly collapse of there was a 21 month extension.

That is possible too, although FF would probably follow the exact same line in their dealings with brexit and the EU

Seth Brundle

liamtech wrote: »

That is possible too, although FF would probably follow the exact same line in their dealings with brexit and the EU

Without wanting to derail the thread, FF would not be likely to take a majority and would enter government possibly with SF. If that were the case it could be a more abrasive stance from the Irish government towards the British ineptness.

ilovesmybrick

Leroy42 wrote: »

IMO, Coveney et al such just stay away at this stage. They are not going to change anyones mind, they are not going to be able to get through to the UK at this point. Focus on domestic and EU issues (obviously Brexit is the biggest but I mean focus on what we can do, how best to prepare, talks with the EU about the future).

To be fair he is the Minister for Foreign Affairs, so he has no choice to be sucked into this mess. The rest of the government seems happy to be leaving it up to him and Varadkar, which is not surprising! From the Inside Politics podcast at the Fianna Fail Ard Fheis it seems that the next major domestic issue could be a 2019 election, but only once Brexit has at least moved on to....something else.

In any normal political cycle in Ireland between the housing issues and the hospital debacle the government would have either collapsed or faced a significant and concerted push towards a GE. Brexit appears to have suspended the conventions of our domestic political cycle. Temporarily.

liamtech

Seth Brundle wrote: »

Without wanting to derail the thread, FF would not be likely to take a majority and would enter government possibly with SF. If that were the case it could be a more abrasive stance from the Irish government towards the British ineptness.

Yes its possible for sure, and yes i dont want to drail either! but firstly i am not sure there would be an election. FF have a vested interest in getting through brexit with a 'not on our watch' mantra/fiction. and even if there were an election, FG would probably remain in power, albeit possibly in coalition with someone else. and i cant see that 'someone else' being SF