Brexit discussion thread VII (Please read OP before posting)

Leroy42

On LBC today JRM said that

sensible people have concerns about leaving without an arrangement.

So even he acknowledges that a No deal is not really an option.

He then went into some rubbish about a limited deal during the transition (which of course the host never asked him how he would get a transition without a deal!)

fash

Strazdas wrote: »

They've effectively gone rogue. This is no normal wheeling and dealing that you see in negotiations, they're acting like a bunch of spivs.

Came across this test on the politics forum from digital spy- (from a large article type text- but can't find the original source). I'm assuming it's true and it shows what the UK is really at:

In relation to the meeting between Selmayr and the UK delegation:

Pat McFadden, a Labour member of the committee, said that Mr Selmayr had asked the Brexit-supporting MPs whether they would vote for Mrs May’s deal if such a change were made. “They weren’t able to,” he said.
One MP present said that Mr Selmayr specifically pressed Ms Jenkyns over whether the adjustments would change her mind. “She was unable to say so,” the MP said. “When he pressed her, she said ‘maybe 80 per cent’ of the way.”

Bit cynical

prawnsambo wrote: »

Well sterling will crash immediately, which will have an immediate effect on pretty much everything since the previous crash in 2016 has pared everything to the bone. And consumer prices will also rise immediately as tariffs start to bite. Couple that with (again immediate) food shortages and I'd suspect that soon would mean a few months. At most.

So the strategy is to hold firm for a few months by which time the UK will cave and agree to the backstop and Ireland escapes a hard border?

lawred2

Bit cynical wrote: »

So the strategy is to hold firm for a few months by which time the UK will cave and agree to the backstop and Ireland escapes a hard border?

No the strategy was to agree a deal in good faith with HMG. This has been done.

The UK failing to get parliamentary appreciate now in bad faith want to unilaterally change that agreement into something not agreeable to the EU.

briany

prawnsambo wrote: »

If they go for that option, then that's it for British farming and industry. No protection, no possibility of a FTA with anyone, market flooded with all kinds of crap and no control whatsoever on standards or even safety. That's the full on, no holds barred, blood on the streets disaster that the Rees-Moggs et al are salivating for.

I remember Kate Hoey on The View about a month ago claiming there was an exception in the Favoured Nations rule for contentious borders / conflict zones. I remember another Brexiteer claiming that it takes years before the WTO even pull members up on breaking the rule. I'm sure Brexiteers have their supply of slippery lines to assuage fears or deflect the point entirely.

Bit cynical

lawred2 wrote: »

No the strategy was to agree a deal in good faith with HMG. This has been done.

The UK failing to get parliamentary appreciate now in bad faith want to unilaterally change that agreement into something not agreeable to the EU.

Thank you lawred2 but I want to know what the strategy is now, not what the strategy was some time ago. It looks like what we are doing, according to another poster on here, is holding firm and expecting the UK to cave within a few months if they exit on no deal.

Imreoir2

Tell me how wrote: »

I'm not so sure. If things proceed on the current path and there is no deal on the 30th of March then the hard Brexiteers will switch in to a different mode.

Government should have been planning for this.
Industry should have been planning for this.
These are teething problems.
The EU is waging war on UK in enforcing hardship on its peoples.
We need leaders who have the same belief in the country as the people have.

This may be a very obvious statement but the next UK general election could see anarchy at the ballot boxes and a ramshackle House of Commons after it when the dust settles leading to more years of poor governance and guidance.
What is interesting about this though is that that could be the case whether they sign a deal or crash out.

That may well be, and might even work for a week or two, but before too long it will be found that there is no plan to be found among the ranks of the Brexiteers to solve the crisis and the emperor will be found to have been naked all along.

prawnsambo

Bit cynical wrote: »

So the strategy is to hold firm for a few months by which time the UK will cave and agree to the backstop and Ireland escapes a hard border?

This is in the context of conceding on the backstop in some, as yet unspecified way or the alternative. The alternative at least has the possibility of them coming back to the table, a concession will be eaten up and then moved on to the next bugbear, real or imagined. And that's the backstop gone for nothing.

Imreoir2

Bit cynical wrote: »

Thank you lawred2 but I want to know what the strategy is now, not what the strategy was some time ago. It looks like what we are doing, according to another poster on here, is holding firm and expecting the UK to cave within a few months if they exit on no deal.

The strategy is what it has been, wait for the UK to decide what they want. They seem to want a deal, but not that deal and definatly not no-deal. One hopes that the impending disaster will focus their minds sufficiently to figure out what they actually want and hopefully that will turn out not to be a crash out disaster for the UK.

If it turns out that they decide to go ahead with a crash-out disaster Brexit, then the strategy will be to wait until they come to their senses and accept the inevitable that they cannot go on without a trade deal with the EU and the associated realisation that such a trade deal comes with certain preconditions that they will have to accept.

Lemming

From a Guardian article apparently penned by a British civil servant, the following quoted below paragraphs chimed with what a family member within the Irish civil service, working with British counterparts among others, said to me two years ago: that there were a lot of very capable people in the British civil service but completely hamstrung by the inept incompetence of their political masters and that a hard brexit was extremely likely.

Bold emphasis is mine

Meanwhile, coverage of the civil service’s orbit around the Brexit plughole has become more and more disquieting over the last couple of years, ranging from cautious realism to despair. Missing from this has been any acknowledgement of the reality that civil servants are only as effective as the ministers they’re legally obliged to serve under. And under the current crop of ministers, with fewer than 60 days to go, the civil service’s morale and ability to deliver any sort of Brexit seems to be evaporating fast. With the clock ticking down, the stakes just keep getting higher.
Advertisement

No-deal Brexit will be horrendously complex and time-consuming to implement, but the mess we are in is political and social, not technical. That’s why officials are haunted by what government ministers still can’t or won’t admit: that any Brexit is going to hurt the country, but a no-deal Brexit is going to rip our arms off, disrupting almost every aspect of British public life except the weather (and maybe even that too).

The second paragraph again puts everything squarely in the realms of (in)competence of political decisions (read politicians), not technocrats (read civil servants). The last sentence is particularly damning in its assessment.

lawred2

Bit cynical wrote: »

Thank you lawred2 but I want to know what the strategy is now, not what the strategy was some time ago. It looks like what we are doing, according to another poster on here, is holding firm and expecting the UK to cave within a few months if they exit on no deal.

What's the alternative?

It's not the EU that can't agree a common position.

Do you want the EU to handhold HMG and the HoC in some way? So much for soverignty.

What is it that you would like to see the EU doing exactly?

demfad

Leroy42 wrote: »

On LBC today JRM said that

So even he acknowledges that a No deal is not really an option.

He then went into some rubbish about a limited deal during the transition (which of course the host never asked him how he would get a transition without a deal!)

I think Mogg is not to be believed. He is part of a massive disinformation campaign pushing for a no-deal outcome.

https://www.desmog.co.uk/2018/08/09/economists-free-trade-meet-independent-experts-ties-climate-science-denial-pushing-no-deal-brexit

Christy42

Bit cynical wrote: »

lawred2 wrote: »

No the strategy was to agree a deal in good faith with HMG. This has been done.

The UK failing to get parliamentary appreciate now in bad faith want to unilaterally change that agreement into something not agreeable to the EU.

Thank you lawred2 but I want to know what the strategy is now, not what the strategy was some time ago. It looks like what we are doing, according to another poster on here, is holding firm and expecting the UK to cave within a few months if they exit on no deal.

It is the only possible strategy if the EU is serious on stopping a hard border.

We can't force the UK to accept a deal. The only part of the WA they said they want the EU to compromise on is the soft border. So we are left with agree to a hard border or no deal into a hard border. The only ways this all results in a soft border are if the UK backs down. Either before or after a no deal. The EU backing down gives us a hard border.

It is all well and good people shouting compromise for a soft border at the EU but it is all rather pointless if the EU has no other options for a soft border. Someone needs to point out an alternative (preferably the UK since they seem eager to do things their own way but seem to want the EU to tell them how to do this).

This is also based on the assumption that there are agreements the UK government would accept. I am not convinced of that. This will be a disaster or they will be going against the will of the people. Politicians don't want to be seen voting for either. A no deal does not need to be voted for.

Infini

demfad wrote: »

I think Mogg is not to be believed. He is part of a massive disinformation campaign pushing for a no-deal outcome.

https://www.desmog.co.uk/2018/08/09/economists-free-trade-meet-independent-experts-ties-climate-science-denial-pushing-no-deal-brexit

In fairness I think most people at this point are pretty convinced that barring an incredible lack of intelligence that Himself and his Euro Troll Group are essentially a 5th column group out to undermine their country for their own personal profit.

Spanish Eyes

JRM, oh yes, the ultra Catholic who bends the knee at Mass and is a Christian. Talk about hypocrisy. He is alright, never changed a nappy but has a gazillion of kids with wifey at home with his slippers between her teeth every night to welcome his return.

I hope you realise that I am being ironic here, otherwise I will get a ban or something.

But honestly, the Brexit process is being orchestrated by himself and ERG and DUP. I doubt this is supported by Leavers in the main.

Brexiteers and jingoists maybe, but no one wants to have another recession, stockpiling, lack of medicines (or even the threat of that) and so on.

It is a tactic to bring fear to the populace. So No Deal is far better than anything agreed by TM. Standard stuff for fifth columnists who want to run the country on their terms.

I know you will all say I am exaggerating, but stranger things have happened. Not so much in the public eye I will grant you. But many people are punch drunk now and will agree to anything to get this out of the way. That is what they want now. IMV.

Trump Is Right

So can anyone else imagine either our government or a UK govt actually putting boots on the ground and enforcing a hard border?

I'm still having trouble seeing that actually taking place, considering the immediate and long-lasting trouble it could bring...

Even as much as our politicians are lap dogs for the EU, I still can't see us being the one's to do it. I wonder what sort of ramifications would occur, if we just refused to do it??

Hurrache

It'll have to be done if there's no deal.

prawnsambo

Trump Is Right wrote: »

So can anyone else imagine either our government or a UK govt actually putting boots on the ground and enforcing a hard border?

I'm still having trouble seeing that actually taking place, considering the immediate and long-lasting trouble it could bring...

Even as much as our politicians are lap dogs for the EU, I still can't see us being the one's to do it. I wonder what sort of ramifications would occur, if we just refused to do it??

Can't really take this post seriously with a comment like that. But the short answer is yes, we will enforce a border.

For Forks Sake

Trade your backstop for World Cup tickets guv'nor?

https://www.rte.ie/news/brexit/2019/0205/1027731-brexit-world-cup/

prawnsambo

For Forks Sake wrote: »

Trade your backstop for World Cup tickets guv'nor?

https://www.rte.ie/news/brexit/2019/0205/1027731-brexit-world-cup/

Good Lord! More bribes. Has the woman no shame? That's the DUP, Labour constituencies in the North East and now us. I suppose it was inevitable, but it's absolutely naked and unashamed bribery.

Seth Brundle

The Irish Americans are getting alarmed over Brexit...

A group of prominent Irish-Americans, including former US Special Envoy to Northern Ireland Gary Hart and five former US ambassadors, have written to British prime minister Theresa May and Taoiseach Leo Varadkar expressing alarm the Belfast Agreement could be jeopardised because of Brexit.

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/politics/this-alarms-us-key-irish-americans-write-to-may-varadkar-on-brexit-1.3783226

Headshot

Seth Brundle wrote: »

The Irish Americans are getting alarmed over Brexit...

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/politics/this-alarms-us-key-irish-americans-write-to-may-varadkar-on-brexit-1.3783226

Good to see our American friends getting involved and will make the British think twice as they will hope to have trade agreement with the USA after Brexit is done.

blanch152

Trump Is Right wrote: »

So can anyone else imagine either our government or a UK govt actually putting boots on the ground and enforcing a hard border?

I'm still having trouble seeing that actually taking place, considering the immediate and long-lasting trouble it could bring...

Even as much as our politicians are lap dogs for the EU, I still can't see us being the one's to do it. I wonder what sort of ramifications would occur, if we just refused to do it??

As a member of the EU, we would be obliged under international law to put a hard border in place in the event of a no-deal Brexit. Similarly, the UK, as a non-member of the EU and a member of GATT would also be obliged to put a hard border in place.

It is absolutely mind-boggling that the posters who are crying and whinging about the UK breaching the Good Friday Agreement (a non-binding international agreement) are often the same ones suggesting that in the event of a hard Brexit that we should ignore our legally binding and enforceable obligations under EU and international law and refuse to impose a hard border.

P.S. not suggesting that you are one of those.

Hurrache

This is mad
https://twitter.com/JamesERothwell/status/1092850824986927104?s=19

RobMc59

Headshot wrote: »

Good to see our American friends getting involved and will make the British think twice as they will hope to have trade agreement with the USA after Brexit is done.

I think they`re alarmed about the prospect of an actual hard border which Ireland are proposing,possibly with armed forces and gardai.

For Forks Sake

Hurrache wrote: »

This is mad
https://twitter.com/JamesERothwell/status/1092850824986927104?s=19

That's a special level of incompetence.

Imreoir2

Trump Is Right wrote: »

So can anyone else imagine either our government or a UK govt actually putting boots on the ground and enforcing a hard border?

I'm still having trouble seeing that actually taking place, considering the immediate and long-lasting trouble it could bring...

Even as much as our politicians are lap dogs for the EU, I still can't see us being the one's to do it. I wonder what sort of ramifications would occur, if we just refused to do it??

Of course I can see our government doing it. Membership of the single market and customs union is vital to our economey. First and foremost we will pressure the UK to implement the backstop even without the withdrawl treaty to protect the GFA, and if they are willing to do so, we will have to convice the EU to reciprocate and accept the arangement. If the UK fail to implement the backstop, then we will have no option but to enforce the border on a temporary, emergency basis, all the while making hell with the UK for breaching the GFA. Hopefully we won't be waiting for too long before the UK throws in the towell but we will have to enforce the border untill they do.

Infini

blanch152 wrote: »

It is absolutely mind-boggling that the posters who are crying and whinging about the UK breaching the Good Friday Agreement (a non-binding international agreement) are often the same ones suggesting that in the event of a hard Brexit that we should ignore our legally binding and enforceable obligations under EU and international law and refuse to impose a hard border.

P.S. not suggesting that you are one of those.

In fairness as has been stated in the past on these threads is that while noone wants one the reality is they really dont want to be the FIRST one to have to put it up. There will be faux pas whatabouttery from some but lets also be realistic a hard border will not just spring up overnight because its not just the local politicss opposed to it but also that noone wants to have to sink costs into building one and maintaining one either unless theres a long term definitive need for it.

We know that at the very least if theres a crashout that what will be required is mobile checks and road closures but these would only be temporary and short term. Realistically if the UK crashes it will likely be bogged down economically and financially if not politically to the point that they'll HAVE to make a deal eventually and that backstop will certainly be part of any future deal. We also could see the possibility of a border poll at some point expecially if a hard brexit validates opinion polls that could see a majority favour a UI at which point the border issue would cease to be a factor in the event of a UI coming about.

Atm though the real issue is the utter lack of clarity and sheet and utter incompetence of the current UK government. It basically leaves us having to make plans but we have no clear idea of how long they'll be needed, if they'll be needed even or what the ultimate long term ending of this utter farce will be.

RobMc59

Imreoir2 wrote: »

Of course I can see our government doing it. Membership of the single market and customs union is vital to our economey. First and foremost we will pressure the UK to implement the backstop even without the withdrawl treaty to protect the GFA, and if they are willing to do so, we will have to convice the EU to reciprocate and accept the arangement. If the UK fail to implement the backstop, then we will have no option but to enforce the border on a temporary, emergency basis, all the while making hell with the UK for breaching the GFA. Hopefully we won't be waiting for too long before the UK throws in the towell but we will have to enforce the border untill they do.

Despite the UK saying they won`t erect a hard border and will respect the GFA we`re still hearing the talk of"boots on the ground"and"We will enforce the border"-is that the route people want to go down?

RobMc59

RobMc59 wrote: »

Despite the UK saying they won`t erect a hard border and will respect the GFA we`re still hearing the talk of"boots on the ground"and"We will enforce the border"-is that the route people want to go down?

Yes, I'd rather Ireland not become a joke of a nation flagrantly disregarding international agreements and norms.