Brexit discussion thread VII (Please read OP before posting)

Leroy42

ilovesmybrick wrote: »

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.

Oh, I totally understand why is is doing it, but at this stage it is clear that the UK are really not listening, so he is simply giving them more ammunition to blame Ireland and the EU.

From my own POV, I have accepted that the only long lasting deal out of all this is a no deal. The UK want to do that, they have convinced themselves that it is the thing to do and anything that avoids that is simply kicking the can down the road. No matter what deal they get, there will always be the case of what if.. what if we had just crashed out.

Imreoir2

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.

To play devils advocate, a long extension works for the EU in legal terms, the UK taking part in the EU elections clears up that particular hard deadline, it allows the whole issue to be pushed comfortably into the term of the next comission rather than having to be dealt with during the transition from one comission to the next and it keeps the UK officially in the EU which, if you would like to see Brexit overturned, gives you enough time for the Brexit referendum in 2016 to seem a like a fairly shabby mandate to make such a momentus change without going back to the people.

That is the case for a long delay, and I think if it came to it, it would suit the EU well enough. I think the reason it is being talked about right now is to put pressure on the ERG types, however.

ilovesmybrick

Leroy42 wrote: »

From my own POV, I have accepted that the only long lasting deal out of all this is a no deal. The UK want to do that, they have convinced themselves that it is the thing to do and anything that avoids that is simply kicking the can down the road. No matter what deal they get, there will always be the case of what if.. what if we had just crashed out.

Yup, after the omnishambles in early December I decided there was no way they were going to reconcile the issues within Westminster enough to get a deal through and that, in the long run, it is better for everyone involved for the UK to crash out. I mean, look at the nonsense coming from IDS in that video Seth posted. No matter what, whether there's a deal, a crash out, or they rescind A50 whoever is on the losing side will blame the EU/Ireland for the inevitable problems that derive from any of those three choices.

At least with a crash out it puts it to the ERG and their compatriots to take a degree of responsibility. It also allows the EU as a whole move on without this mess dominating proceedings. Ireland will be absolutely hammered, but to be honest unless they rescind A50 Ireland is between a rock and a hard place and at least we will have support from the EU.

CatInABox

Nice article here on what comes after a no deal brexit.

However, one largely unexplored question is what deal comes after "no-deal’? Most forecasts seem to assume that the EU and the UK will live with "no-deal" between them for the long term, but this is highly unlikely. In the case of a no-deal, both sides would likely suffer an enormous economic and political shock and would probably quickly return to the negotiating table to mitigate the damage.

The immediate political fallout of a no-deal scenario is difficult to predict. It is an open question when negotiations between the two sides would resume. Luckily, the legal side of things is a good deal clearer. No deal would probably result in the UK having to swallow those bits of the withdrawal agreement it is finding so unpalatable, including the Irish backstop. It all comes down to the procedures for approving any new deal under EU law and under UK law.

Apparently, Ireland's hand actually becomes stronger after a no deal, legally speaking anyway, as Ireland will have an actual veto, rather than just a political veto, as any post no deal agreement needs unanimous approval, rather than the qualified agreement currently needed. Can't see Ireland being thrown under the bus in any case, but still.

CelticRambler

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.

I don't think it is a derailment of the thread, as Brexit is affecting the electoral processes elsewhere in the EU, either forcing an unnatural stability as in the case in Ireland, or influencing voters' expectations of what their radical parties can realistically achieve.

Here in France, to the surprise of many, topping the first poll of voting intentions for the EP elections is Macron's party, despite the antics of the gilet jaunes. That poll showed that if the gilet jaunes field candidates, they'll take votes away from the other "parties of discontent". Incidentally, the French equivalents of the Labour and Tory parties continue to trudge in the mud of don't know/don't care single-figure preferences. I can't quite decide whether the future of the party system in the UK will follow this pattern or still has a way to go down the US path of hate-and-smear polarity. My feeling is that, despite everything, the British are Europeans and the 11 TIGgers are the start of a continental style re-balancing of the HoC.

Leroy42

It is one of the many blindspots of the brexiteer position, and one that is hardly, if ever, brought up in interviews. Exactly what happens after Brexit day?

We have a fair idea of the process under the WA, although there is still plenty to work on, but under No deal, what is the plan? Do they honestly believe that the EU will not come looking for the £39bn? Do they think that the Irish border issue will simply disappear?

Even under a FTA, the UK will need to make certain choices about which regulations to accept. But that hasn't been discussed. It is very likely that the EU will want some form of work permit system and offer of some stability for EU citizens. Why would they accept that maybe China gets more FoM access to the UK?

But because the UK is still debating how they are even going to leave they haven't even, seemingly, considered that it actually means.

Schnitzler Hiyori Geta

MrMusician18 wrote: »

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

I'm not sure "collapse" is the fair word here. It seems there is little interest in this Government continuing, I think FF and FG both fancy their chances in an election but they're doing the responsible thing and waiting until after Brexit. In the event of a lengthy extension, I see no reason why all parties wouldn't be saying (IMO correctly) let's get this election done now rather than wait until it lines up nearer the new Brexit date in 2021.

blackwhite

Leroy42 wrote: »

It is one of the many blindspots of the brexiteer position, and one that is hardly, if ever, brought up in interviews. Exactly what happens after Brexit day?

We have a fair idea of the process under the WA, although there is still plenty to work on, but under No deal, what is the plan? Do they honestly believe that the EU will not come looking for the £39bn? Do they think that the Irish border issue will simply disappear?

Even under a FTA, the UK will need to make certain choices about which regulations to accept. But that hasn't been discussed. It is very likely that the EU will want some form of work permit system and offer of some stability for EU citizens. Why would they accept that maybe China gets more FoM access to the UK?

But because the UK is still debating how they are even going to leave they haven't even, seemingly, considered that it actually means.

Unfortunately, I think the average Brexiteer is following a thought process something akin to:

Step 1: Vote to Leave
Step 2: Leave with no Deal
Step 3: ?????????????
Step 4: Profit Britannia Rules the Waves; the glorious empire is restored; etc. etc.

Schnitzler Hiyori Geta

BBC reporting that large group of Tory MPs looking for PM to delay until 23 May. Not sure what good that will do if I'm honest... "can we have no backstop? No? How about now?"

blackwhite

The only rationale for a short-term deferral would be if a deal that could pass the HOC was close to being reached.
The problem is, a deal has been negotiated but the HOC isn't too keen on it.

A short-term deferral does nothing to help that problem.

A longer deferral that allows for a UK general election, or else a "People's Vote" on the deal, is really the only scenario where a deferral makes sense.

Leroy42

The signals are pretty clear now that a delay is in the offing. Too many are stating that it 'could' be an option, despite the PM constantly repeating that 29th is the only date.

This is the usual course of events. TM states over and over again that a position is definite, then a few rumours 'leak out' that others are looking for it, and then all of a sudden TM will explain that it really is the only option.

But Rutte (PM of Holland) said today that an extension needs to be 1st called for by TM but also explained as to what it hopes to achieve.

ilovesmybrick

https://twitter.com/bbclaurak/status/1099988446855217152

MPs may vote to delay Brexit, but are they going to be able to convince the EU to grant them one?

I'll be incredibly disappointed in the EU if they allow a delay. The deal is there, the individual MPs need to grow up and vote and act responsibly. Or at least within the narrow bounds they've given themselves with "respecting the vote" and get the deal done and dusted.

Mezcita

Imreoir2 wrote: »

To play devils advocate, a long extension works for the EU in legal terms, the UK taking part in the EU elections clears up that particular hard deadline, it allows the whole issue to be pushed comfortably into the term of the next comission rather than having to be dealt with during the transition from one comission to the next and it keeps the UK officially in the EU which, if you would like to see Brexit overturned, gives you enough time for the Brexit referendum in 2016 to seem a like a fairly shabby mandate to make such a momentus change without going back to the people.

That is the case for a long delay, and I think if it came to it, it would suit the EU well enough. I think the reason it is being talked about right now is to put pressure on the ERG types, however.

Is a delay really in the EU's long term interests though? Letting this farce rumble on for another few years would simply act as a thorn in their side when the focus should be on maintaining the long term integrity of the EU. To me the UK's decision to leave the EU could be a nice test case for any other EU member thinking of doing the same. A nice big economy with plenty to lose. They should be allowed to fall on their own sword if they want to.

For some time I've had the belief that literally the only thing which will make the Brexit fans come to their senses is when things start going bad. Because it would happen at such an accelerated pace that the blame game would quickly end up at the very people who led them to this place. That simply needs to happen. Because the alternative is year after year of the UK failing to address the problems within. To blame the EU for everything wrong in the UK.

The EU should not be responsible for saving the UK from their own self inflicted wounds. If the UK wants to go it alone then that's fine. But they should not be treated patiently after so many instances of the UK acting like a rogue state during the last few years of negotiations.

Topgear on Dave

I caught the end of Sammy Wilson on Sean O Rourke and I don't think he was his usual wild combative insulting self.

LuckyLloyd

The UK have already put themselves in a scenario where they require an extension in order to facilitate the WA. Once their parliamentary consensus desires an extension it merely transfers more leverage to the EU side. There's plenty to be dictated here as a price for an extension.

Zubeneschamali

Deleted User wrote: »

I'll be incredibly disappointed in the EU if they allow a delay.

If the choices are No Deal or a delay, the EU should agree any delay the UK asks for since No Deal is the worst case anyhow.

RobMc59

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

The UK have already put themselves in a scenario where they require an extension in order to facilitate the WA. Once their parliamentary consensus desires an extension it merely transfers more leverage to the EU side. There's plenty to be dictated here as a price for an extension.

Sky news are reporting the Taoiseach is very happy that the UK may be about to ask for an extension-also saying that if they do ask the EU may insist on up to a 2 year extension rather than a few months-if that happens,I don't think brexit will happen at all.

reslfj

NIMAN wrote: »

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

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

The Brexit discussions has not started for real yet. The TM deal is only the Withdrawal Agreement (WA) - the 'easy' part.

The trade and future relation negotiation hasn't started yet. Only some listing of general point to be negotiated has been put on paper in the no binding Political Declaration (PD).

You will hear about Brexit negotiation for the next 5-10 years to come.

Revoke A50 and Brexit be over not immediately but far sooner.

Lars

farmchoice

i think any extension is the beginning of the end for brexit. once the uk step away from the cliff edge and take time to think then the air will go out the whole thing.
the ERG know this and will do anything to avoid it, thats why they might go for the WA deal if thats the choice.

her previous ploy of WA or no deal hasn't worked so now it might be WA or extension( no brexit).

Schnitzler Hiyori Geta

Leroy42 wrote: »

The signals are pretty clear now that a delay is in the offing. Too many are stating that it 'could' be an option, despite the PM constantly repeating that 29th is the only date.

This is the usual course of events. TM states over and over again that a position is definite, then a few rumours 'leak out' that others are looking for it, and then all of a sudden TM will explain that it really is the only option.

But Rutte (PM of Holland) said today that an extension needs to be 1st called for by TM but also explained as to what it hopes to achieve.

Can't agree with anything more than that last point... EU should not offer an extension and if/when UK seeks an extension the question should be "to what end".

Deleted User wrote: »

I'll be incredibly disappointed in the EU if they allow a delay. The deal is there, the individual MPs need to grow up and vote and act responsibly. Or at least within the narrow bounds they've given themselves with "respecting the vote" and get the deal done and dusted.

I have zero objection to a short delay for a valid purpose - 2nd referendum seeming like the only truly valid purpose at the stage, but I agree, no extension for no reason other than to kick the can a bit.

Laois_Man

RobMc59 wrote: »

if that happens,I don't think brexit will happen at all.

Well there's no way the Tory's would go far into Round 2 with Teresa May as leader - even if they have to bide their time 'til next December to put in another no-confidence vote on her. Would she win again in such a scenario?

Regardless of who the new PM would be, if any, this set of MPs are still never gonna agree and I think the can will get kicked down the road until after the 2022 election, with the expectation that the result will nullify the DUP's influence, which the DUP will know and which they will try their hardest to prevent. The would result in a hard border down the Irish sea which would have occurred 14 months ago but for the DUP's influence.

It also gives time for a new Labour Party leader to be elected. Surely they won't think it wise to keep Corbyn on as leader - which changes the landscape further.

Lots of complications ahead - but I do think Brexit will happen eventually. But it's still years away - I think 4 years away!

joe40

If there is a significant delay to article 50 and a general election is held during this time, surely it will be unbelievably complicated and divisive.
Both the main parties, Labour and conservatives, have strong remain elements and strong leave elements.

It seems to me that no party will be able to maintain unity while at the same time adopting an agreed position on Brexit, on which to fight a general election.

It would be an eventful election

reslfj

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

If the choices are No Deal or a delay, the EU should agree any delay the UK asks for since No Deal is the worst case anyhow.

'No deal' is unpleasant for the EU27, bad for some EU27 countries and for some groups in EU27 (flower growers in the Netherlands, Lurpak from Denmark)
But the harm will be limited for the rest of the EU27. EU's SM and good FTAs will provide plenty of new market opportunities.

Ireland will likely need some EU help mostly with transport and with moving some export from destination UK to other markets in the rest of EU27 and to the world market using the EU's 40+ central FTA deals.

The UK needs imported food and will need to continue import from EU27 including Ireland.

Ireland is small compared to the 440 mill in 'EU26'. Irish products are well respected. Ireland again has a strong economy and it's economically feasible to give Ireland support in a 'no deal' situation.
Important , such support will also be backed by the electorate within 'EU26', I'm sure, as long as the Irish act united and with good governance.

The UK, however, will have very few trade deals active and has to trade with both WTO tariffs and much WTO red tape (country of origin, delays, paperwork etc.)

It will very fast - even with the EU proposed 9-12 months unilateral extensions of UK flights, lorry driving into EU27, UK financial services ... - be deeply problematic to be the UK or in the UK.

HMG will last for mere months after a 'no deal' i'm afraid.

Lars

spacecoyote

Good article in FT today on what will potentially happen post a No Deal Brexit.

https://www.ft.com/content/738a995a-35ca-11e9-bd3a-8b2a211d90d5

I know that its pay-walled so some quotes for reference:

If Britain leaves the EU without a deal next month, Europe’s Brexit negotiators will not end talks but reset their clocks to a new cliff-edge date: April 18.

...

By April 18, according to European Commission contingency plans, Britain must confirm whether to make about €7bn of net contributions to the EU’s budget for 2019. The first payments, which require House of Commons approval, are scheduled for April 30; EU negotiators say missing them will “ruin” relations.

...

Driving the EU side will be a new aim: making Britain meet its withdrawal treaty obligations, including the €45bn budget bill and backstop arrangements to avoid a hard border on the island of Ireland, even though the treaty itself will have perished.

...

As a result, a no-deal exit would kick off the most fast-paced and consequential period of negotiations since the Brexit referendum in 2016. “This is when it all shakes out,” said one senior EU diplomat closely involved in Brexit.

...

“Here in Berlin, people are starting to realise that no-deal Brexit is not an event in itself but a new phase of the process,” said Nicolai von Ondarza of the German Institute for International and Security Studies.“It will not mean the breakdown of negotiations but a different form of negotiation.”

...

“The Brits will be back to the negotiating table within weeks,” said one senior EU figure directly involved in handling Brexit. “We will say, yes, by all means let’s discuss the future. First, here is the backstop and the financial settlement.”

...

Seen from the EU, talks would fall into three related strands. First are areas such as fisheries and money...

A second area covers fundamental concerns — such as the maintenance of peace in Northern Ireland, financial stability in markets and public health...

The final big area of concern is the wider economy, and how to manage Britain suddenly becoming a “third country”.

...

The commission’s contingency plans temporarily relax laws for about a year...so as long as the steps are “reciprocated” by London.

...

The EU sees its bargaining power as coming from managing the implementation of rules that can cause huge disruption to trade — such as customs checks or providing authorisations.

...

The EU has particular sway in the area of agricultural trade. UK exports face 100 per cent checks under EU law after Brexit. But, for this point even to be reached, Brussels must first authorise the UK as “competent” to export to the EU — a decision that one senior EU diplomat noted might take a day or “maybe a lot longer”, depending on the state of relations

...

Capitalising on this bargaining power is a high risk strategy for the EU. Britain could impose tariffs...But some in Brussels see Britain having few options but to lower trade barriers if it wants to avoid food shortages

...

Calculations on the balance of power in a no-deal scenario depend heavily on one factor: they assume the UK government will have the political leeway and authority to do deals. While some EU negotiators are confident the UK will have little choice but to co-operate, because of the economic hit in a no-deal scenario, some member states are more unsure.

...

when the UK’s exit from the bloc becomes a reality, it will be impossible to predict shifts in British politics, whether because of resignations or elections. “I cannot imagine a hard Brexit will mean business as usual in British politics,” the adviser said. “Something has to happen.”

Zubeneschamali

Schnitzler Hiyori Geta wrote: »

I agree, no extension for no reason other than to kick the can a bit.

Maybe the horse will learn to sing.

storker

ilovesmybrick wrote: »

MPs may vote to delay Brexit, but are they going to be able to convince the EU to grant them one?

On a personal level I really hope not. Another two years of this pantomime will do my head in. There's a part of me thinking let them have their damned Brexit good and hard and let everyone else get on with adjusting to it. Such thoughts are of course tempered by the fact that Ireland, adjusting to it could be quite painful.

An Ciarraioch

Slowly, slowly, catchee monkey:

http://twitter.com/tconnellyRTE/status/1100013802408554496

CelticRambler

Theresa May repeatedly states that "Britain will leave the EU on the 29th March". Is there any record of her specifying which year?

LuckyLloyd

RobMc59 wrote: »

Sky news are reporting the Taoiseach is very happy that the UK may be about to ask for an extension-also saying that if they do ask the EU may insist on up to a 2 year extension rather than a few months-if that happens,I don't think brexit will happen at all.

Brexit happening or not happening is of little concern to the EU. The longer this drags on the more uncertainty hammers UK business and creates leverage and opportunity. The UK has fundamentally failed to create leverage for itself through the process and preventing that is exactly why the Backstop cannot be let go from the EU side, as a potential border in Ireland would be leveraged by the UK during the Free Trade negotiations phase.

Meanwhile the EU continues to get its ducks in a row for No Deal and is clearly in a superior state of preparedness than the UK. If you take all of the emotion and rhetoric out of things and coldly analyse Brexit as a process (because it isn't an event, as Brexiteers might consider it) the EU is manipulating its stronger hand at every turn.

spacecoyote wrote:

Good article in FT today on what will potentially happen post a No Deal Brexit.

https://www.ft.com/content/738a995a-...a-8b2a211d90d5

I know that its pay-walled so some quotes for reference:

And this just further drives that home. The EU continues to consider and prepare for all eventualities while keeping its shared primary objectives front and center at all times. We are witnessing diplomacy and negotiating prowess that is quite formidable. On the other side, the UK's government has lost control of the process and that is cheered by Brexiteers. When it highlights their weakness, vulnerability and incompetence from a process point of view. The only truly unilateral actions it can take (withdraw A50 / exit in a disorderly fashion) further weaken it and divide it politically.

If this was a fight the ref would have stopped it long ago.