Brexit discussion thread VIII (Please read OP before posting)

Loafing Oaf

Roger_007 wrote: »

I think that May is going to get her deal through.

Is there any solid reason to believe this as yet? Still at 7/4 with PP...

A Dub in Glasgo

Great article by Tony Connelly on the RTE website regarding the recent shenanigans with the Tories

https://www.rte.ie/news/analysis-and-comment/2019/0315/1036688-backstop-deal-cox/

It is difficult to think that MPs will back the WA unless they show some contrition and realise that the high stakes poker with the EU has failed

Joe_ Public

Win or lose the vote, it’s hard to see what good can lie in store for the pm (in name anyway) at this stage. Her own career may well even be the price for getting it through, assuming her iron stubbornness doesn’t preclude her from swallowing that bitter pill.

Watching her almost stooped on the commons bench during the week, her voice shriveled to a croak, i was tempted to feel some pity for her until quickly remembering how much of her hand is all over this sorry mess. In retrospect it seemed a good thing that a remainer slipped into the hot seat, by default if anything, suggesting we might get a soft landing acceptable to both sides but instead from the start she opted to pander to her party’s hard right, implemented her stupid red lines and wasted time they should have spent preparing for brexit by concentrating on trying to strengthen her political hand and failing dismally.

Puts things in perspective in this country i feel. Somehow we have put a lot of the old civil war baggage behind us in enabling a certain level of cross party cooperation that has helped us take some momentous forward leaps these past few years. The British political system, in contrast, remains mired in the past. They needed a leader capable of driving brexit through a morass of deep division but not at all sure that figure exists at the moment.

farmerval

If the ERG and DUP vote for Theresa Mays deal, and most likely some of the ERG won't will enough pro European Tory's vote against it and sink it again? Will the new centre grouping vote against it?
Could the notion that the DUP and ERG are the only ines holding a whip hand be proven incorrect?

Strazdas

Roger_007 wrote: »

I think that May is going to get her deal through. I don't know if she planned it this way, but as we approach the deadline the DUP and ERG are looking increasingly stupid to reject a deal that gives them more or less everything they wanted and with the distinct possibility that there could be another referendum which they might lose.
The next time around I expect the arch-brexiteers to vote for it while protesting loudly that they did so holding their noses.
TM might look like a master tactician in retrospect!

It might be no bad thing if the deal goes through. Britain is in chaos and so divided that it is difficult to see how they could remain in the EU, not without causing disruption to everyone else for years to come. The EU might breathe a huge sigh of relief if they back the deal : there are simply too many embittered EU haters in the UK.

Roanmore

A Dub in Glasgo wrote: »

Great article by Tony Connelly on the RTE website regarding the recent shenanigans with the Tories

https://www.rte.ie/news/analysis-and-comment/2019/0315/1036688-backstop-deal-cox/

It is difficult to think that MPs will back the WA unless they show some contrition and realise that the high stakes poker with the EU has failed

I read that earlier, Cox is a disgrace. "I haven't been here in 40 years" when Barnier welcomed him to Brussels. He's a Brexiteer isn't he?
I don't believe he wants to give legal assurances?

A Dub in Glasgo

A Dub in Glasgo wrote: »

Great article by Tony Connelly on the RTE website regarding the recent shenanigans with the Tories

https://www.rte.ie/news/analysis-and-comment/2019/0315/1036688-backstop-deal-cox/

It is difficult to think that MPs will back the WA unless they show some contrition and realise that the high stakes poker with the EU has failed

That's an excellent article.


The end made me chuckle: One legal expert in Brussels wryly pointed out that if, according to the Vienna Convention the "fundamental change" had to be "unforeseen", then you couldn’t really advertise in advance that that was your course of action.

Enzokk

A Dub in Glasgo wrote: »

Great article by Tony Connelly on the RTE website regarding the recent shenanigans with the Tories

https://www.rte.ie/news/analysis-and-comment/2019/0315/1036688-backstop-deal-cox/

It is difficult to think that MPs will back the WA unless they show some contrition and realise that the high stakes poker with the EU has failed

That article has some great nuggets in it. Firstly it seems that Cox didn't make a great impression with the EU negotiating team.

But when he arrived in Brussels as part of the UK negotiating team the chemistry was not good.

According to a senior official, when Michel Barnier welcomed him to Brussels, Cox boomed: "I haven’t been here in forty years!"

...

Cox infuriated Barnier’s deputy Sabine Weyand by calling her "my dear" during what were described as "robust" exchanges.

EU negotiators then realised that the bulk of his proposals were actually at odds with May’s focus at Sharm El-Sheikh on the concept of "capricousness".

It seems that, booming voice notwithstanding, Cox appears not to be much better a politician than those other cabinet ministers that May has appointed. The final few paragraphs makes for interesting reading as well.

With the DUP now keen for a ladder to climb down, having declared unequivocally that the Cox advice proved Theresa May had failed to get the backstop changes they demanded, the Attorney General was reported to be looking at Article 62 of the Vienna Convention in a desperate bid to give the party some cover.

Article 62 allows a country to walk away from a treaty if there has been a "fundamental change" in circumstance that were unforeseen when the treaty was agreed.

According to the Daily Telegraph, Cox was arguing that if the backstop was "having a socially destabilising effect on Northern Ireland" then that could be seen as a "fundamental change".

One legal expert in Brussels wryly pointed out that if, according to the Vienna Convention the "fundamental change" had to be "unforeseen", then you couldn’t really advertise in advance that that was your course of action.

In another week of brain-stretching chaos in London, this, perhaps, summed it all up.

It is worrying when one of the people you perceived to be a shining light for the madness in the UK at the moment turns out to have just as little clothes as the emperor and is in fact also standing there stark naked.

trashcan

The degree of ineptitude in the British Govt is really quite staggering isn't it ? If this was an episode of "The Thick of It" or "Yes Minister" you'd think it was OTT. Crazy stuff.

charlie14

Roger_007 wrote: »

I think that May is going to get her deal through. I don't know if she planned it this way, but as we approach the deadline the DUP and ERG are looking increasingly stupid to reject a deal that gives them more or less everything they wanted and with the distinct possibility that there could be another referendum which they might lose.
The next time around I expect the arch-brexiteers to vote for it while protesting loudly that they did so holding their noses.
TM might look like a master tactician in retrospect!

If she does get it through it will be nothing do do with her masterly tactical planning. It will be because of the HoC amended vote to take no deal off the table. An option that was one of her red lines and an amendment she opposed on the night.

trashcan

trashcan wrote: »

The degree of ineptitude in the British Govt is really quite staggering isn't it ? If this was an episode of "The Thick of It" or "Yes Minister" you'd think it was OTT. Crazy stuff.

Plots have to make sense and be believable. Real life has no such restrictions.

Roger_007

trashcan wrote: »

The degree of ineptitude in the British Govt is really quite staggering isn't it ? If this was an episode of "The Thick of It" or "Yes Minister" you'd think it was OTT. Crazy stuff.

Whilst it is great entertainment, unfortunately we are the ones who might suffer the most. 'When elephants fight, the grass gets trampled'.

Capt'n Midnight

black forest wrote: »

Have a look at these numbers. Not quite sure if Liam Fox is calling this a success.


twitter.com/commonsinttrade/status/1106543184505696258?s=21


There is only one word which comes to mind: Devastating

3% of trade rolled over ?

A good chunk of that is related to the £4Bn in aid for Southern Africa.

And the Swiss deal has nothing to do with London being the centre of gold trading ?


And many are like the WA, not the final deal, just placeholders until a final deal is done.

An Claidheamh

Could someone clear this up for me.

The only reason the UK ought to be allowed get an extension would surely be if they agreed (for real this time) to a sea border.

Is Coveney pushing this?

And TM and the HOC should unequivocally agree to this!

No more tip toeing. No more appeasement.

An Ciarraioch

The Tories have told their current MEPs to be on an election footing:

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/mar/16/tories-tell-meps-to-consider-election-run-if-brexit-deal-fails

Capt'n Midnight

Shelga wrote: »

How much time has been wasted on Brexit over the last 3 years. How much money, energy, goodwill, patience and effort.

Cost 2% of lost growth. £80Bn. If they leave it'll be worse.

Goodwill ? 97% of trading under existing EU deals isn't being rolled forward.

During the Battle of Crete the Royal Navy was loosing a lot of ships rescuing the army. Admiral Cunningham said It takes the Navy three years to build a ship. It will take three hundred years to build a new tradition. The evacuation will continue

By threatening to ignore the WTO and nixing the backstop on day one they are tearing up traditional UK diplomacy. It's like cashing in on a brand name, it takes a long time to undo the damage.

Time etc. consider all the stuff that Brexit is derailing in the UK parliament

Capt'n Midnight

Capt'n Midnight wrote: »

Cost 2% of lost growth. £80Bn. If they leave it'll be worse.

Goodwill ? 97% of trading under existing EU deals isn't being rolled forward.

During the Battle of Crete the Royal Navy was loosing a lot of ships rescuing the army. Admiral Cunningham said It takes the Navy three years to build a ship. It will take three hundred years to build a new tradition. The evacuation will continue

By threatening to ignore the WTO and nixing the backstop on day one they are tearing up traditional UK diplomacy. It's like cashing in on a brand name, it takes a long time to undo the damage.

Time etc. consider all the stuff that Brexit is derailing in the UK parliament

In that article that was talked about above, it mentions Barnier being angry because Cox suggested that the UK could go for arbitration the day after Brexit.

It's that sort of unashamed fữckery that is damaging the UK's reputation so badly.

Capt'n Midnight

Roger_007 wrote: »

I think that May is going to get her deal through.

Brexiteers will vote it down as they know the clock is still ticking.

Remainers will vote it down as May can't ignore the will of Parliament which has ruled out No Deal.

It can't be extended short term without either Parliament decisively agreeing something and a small majority won't cut it given the swings back and forth. Even cabinet ministers and May have changed sides between similar votes so it has to be really decisive.

The only way May can get her deal through is by threatening something worse, because democracy.


A good long Extend might work.
Leaves May in No. 10. Suits the DUP too. Keeps an election at bay because the ERG don't want Labour getting in.

Revoke is the sane option. It's the only one that provides stability to business.


But we don't know May's motives and a Hard Brexit is still the default. But the fallout would ruin her reputation.

Headshot

Capt'n Midnight wrote: »

Brexiteers will vote it down as they know the clock is still ticking.

Remainers will vote it down as May can't ignore the will of Parliament which has ruled out No Deal.

It can't be extended short term without either Parliament decisively agreeing something and a small majority won't cut it given the swings back and forth. Even cabinet ministers and May have changed sides between similar votes so it has to be really decisive.

The only way May can get her deal through is by threatening something worse, because democracy.


A good long Extend might work.
Leaves May in No. 10. Suits the DUP too. Keeps an election at bay because the ERG don't want Labour getting in.

Revoke is the sane option. It's the only one that provides stability to business.


But we don't know May's motives and a Hard Brexit is still the default. But the fallout would ruin her reputation.

Europe wont want a long extensions given the lines of Farage being voted back in as MEP. The UK will bring poison with them if MEPs are voted back into Europe.

Sam Russell

Headshot wrote: »

Europe wont want a long extensions given the lines of Farage being voted back in as MEP. The UK will bring poison with them if MEPs are voted back into Europe.

They might be a unifying force with the rest of the European Parliament.

robindch

Capt'n Midnight wrote: »

A good long Extend might work.

Would be fun if WA were not approved by 30th March, that the EU would choose to honor existing arrangements unilaterally until either 1) the UK chose to do otherwise, in which case all treaties lapse as per Article 50 or 2) held a binding national referendum on whether to accept the WA, thus bypassing the hamstrung HoC, or revoke Article 50.

An Ciarraioch

A significant development, as the ERG MP, Daniel Kawczynski, announces he will vote for May's deal next week:

http://twitter.com/DKShrewsbury/status/1106902549397938176

Sam Russell

robindch wrote: »

Would be fun if WA were not approved by 30th March, that the EU would choose to honor existing arrangements unilaterally until either 1) the UK chose to do otherwise, in which case all treaties lapse as per Article 50 or 2) held a binding national referendum on whether to accept the WA, thus bypassing the hamstrung HoC, or revoke Article 50.

It would be very stupid for the UK HoC to let the crash-out happen by accident. They have already voted to not allow it, so it should not happen. I would think that they would go for Revoke if it got too close.

In fact, if the EU put conditions on an extension and the WA is not voted through, then I would think revoke is the only option for them.

But stupid is as stupid does.

trellheim

Martin Selmayr tweeting about MEP elections ... it is always fun to watch.

CelticRambler

An Ciarraioch wrote: »

A significant development, as the ERG MP, Daniel Kawczynski, announces he will vote for May's deal next week:

http://twitter.com/DKShrewsbury/status/1106902549397938176

One Twitter thread does not a revolution make, but the amount of "traitor" reponses to his decision is impressive. :eek: This is the ERG's nightmare - every argument they made against the WA will be a stick for their own supporters to beat them with if they vote in favour of it now.

Sparko

Deleted User wrote: »

In that article that was talked about above, it mentions Barnier being angry because Cox suggested that the UK could go for arbitration the day after Brexit.

It's that sort of unashamed fữckery that is damaging the UK's reputation so badly.

It's baffling how on the UK side they constantly shoot their mouths off to the press, on twitter etc as if they don't realise the EU and the rest of the world can see this.

Enzokk

CelticRambler wrote: »

One Twitter thread does not a revolution make, but the amount of "traitor" reponses to his decision is impressive. :eek: This is the ERG's nightmare - every argument they made against the WA will be a stick for their own supporters to beat them with if they vote in favour of it now.

It will take some climb down from those MPs to explain to an irrational base that they have done the right thing. I will not feel sorry for them though. They have made their beds and they now have to lie in them. Good luck in trying to defend that decision.

trellheim

May still thinks she will get it through on the third round.

robindch

Sam Russell wrote: »

It would be very stupid for the UK HoC to let the crash-out happen by accident. They have already voted to not allow it, so it should not happen.

Unfortunately, it's insufficient for the HoC to vote not to allow a crash-out, since the HoC also needs to vote to do something to avoid it.

As somebody pointed out, the HoC can no more vote not to crash-out than the Titanic could vote for the iceberg not to crash into it.

marno21

An Ciarraioch wrote: »

A significant development, as the ERG MP, Daniel Kawczynski, announces he will vote for May's deal next week:

http://twitter.com/DKShrewsbury/status/1106902549397938176

The responses to this and other of his Tweets are just downright bizarre coming from a neutral, non-UK point of view.

"You will lose your seat in the next election unless you do your utmost to push the policies that will do the most damage to the social and economic future of this country"