Brexit discussion thread VIII (Please read OP before posting)

Enzokk

Hurrache wrote: »

So normal bizarro world Brexit services resume after the Easter break
https://twitter.com/Peston/status/1121307027106598912

I wonder what they think this will achieve. If it passes, will the EU reopen the negotiations on the backstop? No, so what is she trying to do?

Enzokk

Enzokk wrote: »

I wonder what they think this will achieve. If it passes, will the EU reopen the negotiations on the backstop? No, so what is she trying to do?

To give the EU the option of accepting the deal without the backstop, or having the possibility of receiving a group of Brexiteer MEPs after the elections.

Which would the EU prefer?

robinph

Enzokk wrote: »

I wonder what they think this will achieve. If it passes, will the EU reopen the negotiations on the backstop? No, so what is she trying to do?

Just for time wasting, nothing else.

If it passes then she'll go back to the EU to ask for "something", they will again tell her to go away, she'll go back to parliament, argue a bit more about nothing in particular, then they vote again on the exact same deal but with the backstop added back in because the meany EU forced the backstop that the UK asked for to be left in, but it's really the EU being mean is the main point.

Enzokk

Deleted User wrote: »

To give the EU the option of accepting the deal without the backstop, or having the possibility of receiving a group of Brexiteer MEPs after the elections.

Which would the EU prefer?

But the EU will not accept a deal without the backstop as we will not accept it. So asking for it is useless and a waste of time. As for a bunch of Brexiteer MEPs, they have been electing them from various nations for years now, I doubt they are concerned about 70 new UK MEPs that will come in.

So again I don't see any reasons for her to do this other than self interest, which helps nobody but Theresa May. Groundhog day for everyone else.

reslfj

Hurrache wrote: »

So normal bizarro world Brexit services resume after the Easter break
https://twitter.com/Peston/status/1121307027106598912

"This extension excludes any re-opening of the Withdrawal Agreement.
Any unilateral commitment, statement or other act by the United Kingdom should be compatible with the letter and the spirit of the Withdrawal Agreement, and must not hamper its implementation. Such an extension cannot be used to start negotiations on the future relationship" /(12) page 6

https://data.consilium.europa.eu/doc/document/XT-20013-2019-INIT/en/pdf

When will the UK understand that the WA text is final - before Brexit and except for deleting the transition periods(s) the WA text is an unconditional EU-prerequisite for all post Brextit negotiations.

The UK answers can be "Yes Yes", "Aye Aye" or "Revoke A50" - only.

Lars

Leroy42

Deleted User wrote: »

To give the EU the option of accepting the deal without the backstop, or having the possibility of receiving a group of Brexiteer MEPs after the elections.

Which would the EU prefer?

Whilst I think there is also a certain amount of unicorns and time wasting involved, my thinking would be that they see the latest extension as a signal that the EU are willing to do almost anything to avoid a hard Brexit.

They know that simply asking for no backstop will get nowhere, but what if TM could actually turn up in Brussels with the Non Backstop WA already passed in the HoC? Instead of WA or No Deal, EU is faced with No Deal or drop the backstop.

It is highly unlikely to get anywhere but I can see the logic is attempting it. It has no downside for TM or the UK.

reslfj

Deleted User wrote: »

...
or having the possibility of receiving a group of Brexiteer MEPs after the elections.

Which would the EU prefer?

Elected MEPs - anytime!

This is a potential problem for the UK, but not for the EU Brexit agenda, which is run by the Michel Barnier on the Council's mandate.

The EP will approve a deal - UK MEPs or not - but has (formally) nothing to say in case of a 'No Deal'

Lars

CrabRevolution

Leroy42 wrote: »

Whilst I think there is also a certain amount of unicorns and time wasting involved, my thinking would be that they see the latest extension as a signal that the EU are willing to do almost anything to avoid a hard Brexit.

They know that simply asking for no backstop will get nowhere, but what if TM could actually turn up in Brussels with the Non Backstop WA already passed in the HoC? Instead of WA or No Deal, EU is faced with No Deal or drop the backstop.

It is highly unlikely to get anywhere but I can see the logic is attempting it. It has no downside for TM or the UK.

It'll go nowhere. It's not like the EU are unaware of the backstop being a problem and will be willing to immediately delete it now that the UK have expressed their displeasure.

I'd see it as an inverse strawman of sorts; where instead of arguing against something your opponent never said, you're approving a deal your opponent never offered.

lawred2

Deleted User wrote: »

To give the EU the option of accepting the deal without the backstop, or having the possibility of receiving a group of Brexiteer MEPs after the elections.

Which would the EU prefer?

The EU includes Ireland.

Ireland won't accept a deal without a backstop.

Ergo the EU won't accept the deal.

Your post is just another Brexiteer "we've got all the cards" delusion

A Dub in Glasgo

reslfj wrote: »

Did Scotland become part of England in 1603 or GB in 1707? Or as late as 1745?

Scotland did not become part of England. Scotland and England joined their respective parliaments in a union of Parliaments to create the United Kingdom of Great Britain in 1707. This was repeated for Ireland in 1801 when it became the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland. If Scotland votes to reinstate its Parliament as an independent country then what does that make the remaining UK? The Union of 1707 will be dissolved

lawred2

lawred2 wrote: »

The EU includes Ireland.

Ireland won't accept a deal without a backstop.

Ergo the EU won't accept the deal.

Your post is just another Brexiteer "we've got all the cards" delusion

Just one card, one that could be in play before the elections. Don't forget that Ireland is a small member in the EU, politicians may prefer the option of removing the backstop to the alternative of many more months of wrangling over the Irish problem.

lawred2

Deleted User wrote: »

Just one card, one that could be in play before the elections. Don't forget that Ireland is a small member in the EU, politicians may prefer the option of removing the backstop to the alternative of many more months of wrangling over the Irish problem.

so why haven't they done that already?

reslfj

lawred2 wrote: »

so why haven't they done that already?

It won't happen. Ireland has played its EU politics very well and has broad support within the EU27.

Very few in the EU27 will do much to help the UK and surely not cry if/when the UK jumps the cliff on October 31.

It will be very ugly in the UK, but the EU27 can easily afford it.
Most EU27 exporting firms are already growing on other markets using existing FTAs, other deals or the SM. The UK will have very few options but paying MFN WTO tariffs for its export into most other countries incl. the EU27.

Lars

Hurrache

Deleted User wrote: »

To give the EU the option of accepting the deal without the backstop, or having the possibility of receiving a group of Brexiteer MEPs after the elections.

Which would the EU prefer?

That is not an option.

ancapailldorcha

Deleted User wrote: »

Just one card, one that could be in play before the elections. Don't forget that Ireland is a small member in the EU, politicians may prefer the option of removing the backstop to the alternative of many more months of wrangling over the Irish problem.

Size doesn't matter. We can see that from the fact that the backstop is a red line for the EU which is a direct result of its solidarity with Ireland. Throwing Ireland under the bus is literally the opposite of what the EU is supposed to be about. It won't happen.

VinLieger

Deleted User wrote: »

Just one card, one that could be in play before the elections. Don't forget that Ireland is a small member in the EU, politicians may prefer the option of removing the backstop to the alternative of many more months of wrangling over the Irish problem.

So were back to the ireland being thrown under the bus at the last minute argument?


Even though it didn't happen on March 29th or April 12th.......

Strazdas

An Ciarraioch wrote: »

Jeremy Hunt engages in a tediously childish spat with the French Ambassador to the US:

http://twitter.com/Jeremy_Hunt/status/1121023834453364737

A foreign minister hurling petty insults at an ambassador on Twitter over a matter of little importance. It's what you might expect from the foreign minister of a banana republic maybe.

Sam Russell

VinLieger wrote: »

So were back to the ireland being thrown under the bus at the last minute argument?


Even though it didn't happen on March 29th or April 12th.......

If there is anyone to be thrown under the bus, it will be the DUP.
There is time enough before Oct for TM to call assembly elections for Stormont, and who knows what the outcome of that will be. Perhaps the UUP will put in a strong performance.

[I doubt TM will be gone before Oct unless by a GE.]

Leroy42

Deleted User wrote: »

Just one card, one that could be in play before the elections. Don't forget that Ireland is a small member in the EU, politicians may prefer the option of removing the backstop to the alternative of many more months of wrangling over the Irish problem.

Because it really has nothing to do with Ireland, the border just happens to be here and th GFA gives the EU the moral high ground.

It is about the EU has an entity. Without control of its own borders how can it consider itself secure (which is exactly the same argument that the Brexiteers use but somehow cannot understand anyone else using!).

One of the major mistakes, there were many, that the UK made was to think if the border question (to the extent that they thought about it at all) in terms of Ireland. That Ireland was small, almost irrelevant to the EU. But just as the Brexiteers like to claim that Brexit is more about sovereignty than trade, the same is true for the EU. It is in fact only because NI is so small that they were even willing to go with the Backstop in the first place.

So in reality the EU has expanded the UK options. What should have been a simply No BRexit of Hard Brexit choice was increased to include this new soft Brexit.

The UK have now spent the last number of months complaining about the EU not being flexible when in reality the EU are the very ones that created the flexibility in the 1st place.

Again, in isolation the EU would probably agree to a deal without a backstop with the UK. But this isn't in isolation. The EU have the remaining members to worry about, prospective members, current trade deal countries and possible future trade deals. All these will be taking a keen interest in how much the EU is willing to give up their stated core beliefs. If the UK can get away with it then you can be certain that the likes of Japan, Canada, US etc will be demanding special treatment.

20silkcut

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Somebody earlier pointed out that British farmers are going to be less than happy about all these trade deals which are proposed to allow agricultural imports from NZ etc in exchange for benefits for financial services. Not only will British farmers lose EU grants, they are going to be the sacrifice in trade deals too from every country.

It's remarkable how lacking in coherence all these sectors that are negatively affected by Brexit are. So much of the blame at this stage rests with the inability of all anti-Brexit sectors to unite, mobilise and publicly show these lies for what they are. It's not like they're short of money or ambitious, cutthroat career and business people, so why aren't they fighting back against a sector of society that isn't known for its, eh, ambition?

I said it before on this thread British farmers have very little clout.
The foot and mouth crisis of 2001 really highlighted that fact.
Britain just carried on and the disease was allowed to run rampant.
That would not happen anywhere else in Europe.

As for other industries that have powerful lobbies the simple fact is you can’t lobby an entire electorate.
Toyota , Nissan etc wouldn’t get much sympathy from wider little England if they made a public appeal or campaigned against Brexit.

marno21

The EU know better than to concede to the UK on the backstop or any of their other scheming tricks. Granting the UK these kind of concessions would do nothing more than embolden Eurosceptics across the continent. It would be suicidal to start throwing bones to the UK.

20silkcut

20silkcut wrote: »

I said it before on this thread British farmers have very little clout.
The foot and mouth crisis of 2001 really highlighted that fact.
Britain just carried on and the disease was allowed to run rampant.
That would not happen anywhere else in Europe.
.

You obviously weren't there during that time, I lived near a farm that was affected by the outbreak and the whole area was in lockdown. Only residents and essential visitors were allowed within the exclusion zone, everyone else had to take long diversions.

They killed all the cattle on every farm for miles and burned the carcases on site before burying them, I remember seeing the fire from miles away.

If you were in another part of the country, unaffected by the outbreak, then there were only restrictions on entering farms or moving animals.

So yes the UK ministry of agriculture did take it very seriously, and did stop the outbreak spreading any further once discovered. The only problem was that the trade in livestock meant that animals from Scotland could be on a farm in Cornwall within 24 hours, it was because some infected cattle were in transit that made the outbreak so large right from the start.

Capt'n Midnight

Deleted User wrote: »

You obviously weren't there during that time, I lived near a farm that was affected by the outbreak and the whole area was in lockdown. Only residents and essential visitors were allowed within the exclusion zone, everyone else had to take long diversions.

The lockdown was so tight that even aliens were affected.

Crop circles just stopped happening for the duration.

View

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Just one card, one that could be in play before the elections. Don't forget that Ireland is a small member in the EU, politicians may prefer the option of removing the backstop to the alternative of many more months of wrangling over the Irish problem.

The EU finished and signed off on the Withdrawal Agreement negotiations back in late November. They have repeatedly stated they are not going to re-open the Withdrawal Agreement negotiations. They will adjust the (non-binding/non-legal) Political Declaration which deals with what the two sides would like to happen AFTER the U.K. has left.

Castlekeeper

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Just one card, one that could be in play before the elections. Don't forget that Ireland is a small member in the EU, politicians may prefer the option of removing the backstop to the alternative of many more months of wrangling over the British/ UK problem.

Fixed that for you.

cunnifferous

Watching Question Time. The level of anger in the audience is only matched by the level of ignorance.

Capt'n Midnight

You know UK politics is in a bad place when Lord Buckethead is worried about splitting the vote despite having having 1 million hits and crowd funding the election campaign in just a few hours.


https://twitter.com/LordBuckethead/status/1120210189418819584

Capt'n Midnight

cunnifferous wrote: »

Watching Question Time. The level of anger in the audience is only matched by the level of ignorance.

+1
QT is painful to watch. It's like they got the Jerry Springer team to choose the audience. Very shouty, and no calling out blatant lies.

cunnifferous

Capt'n Midnight wrote: »

+1
QT is painful to watch. It's like they got the Jerry Springer team to choose the audience. Very shouty, and no calling out blatant lies.

The show as it is contributes nothing to any kind of public debate. It's just pure embarrassment for pretty much everyone involved.

bilston

When I see that QT audience behaving like that I worry about the future. Britain is in a mess.