Brexit discussion thread IX (Please read OP before posting)

Peregrinus

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

Disagree - if the UK crashes out, the gloves come off. England will have just dragged 5 million Scottish EU citizens out against their will through nationalist hubris and diplomatic incompetence, I see no reason why the EU should give two figs for their national integrity.

Make the Scots an offer on Brexit Day + 1.

The EU absolutely will not do that. Won't consider it for an instant.

J Mysterio

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

Disagree - if the UK crashes out, the gloves come off. England will have just dragged 5 million Scottish EU citizens out against their will through nationalist hubris and diplomatic incompetence, I see no reason why the EU should give two figs for their national integrity.


Make the Scots an offer on Brexit Day + 1.

Eh... I think they need to be an independent nation first..

Enzokk

Gintonious wrote: »

https://twitter.com/talkRADIO/status/1149026739781287937

Its the same stuff, everyday and night.

This is what I have thought would happen if if even make whispers of a border or plans, it will be seized on by Brexiteers and twisted to suit their needs. Just like the GATT Article 24 is twisted and used when we know it cannot be used, the lie will spread faster than the facts.

bob mcbob

A Dub in Glasgo wrote: »

Rumours in Scotland that a poll done for the UK Govt about Scottish Independence has panicked the UK Govt hence Mays rushed visit to Scotland last week attack the SNP. I have spoken to quite a few people in work who did not vote or voted no in the last independence referendum who are dismayed at what is going on and have stated they will vote Yes next time (if the UK Govt allow it)

https://twitter.com/ScotNational/status/1146317217421832192

https://twitter.com/heraldscotland/status/1148937413567188992

https://twitter.com/heraldscotland/status/1149030314003566593

My brother in law was incredibly anti independence and SNP with not a good word to say about either. Obviously he voted no.

He stunned me last week when he would now vote SNP with the implication he also would vote yes.

Professor Moriarty

Peregrinus wrote: »

Only 32% favour a no-deal Brexit but the remaining 68% do not necessarily favour a deal; they are split between those who favour a deal, those who favour remain and the don't-knows.

The ground shifts after Brexit; a WA is no longer possible, obviously. Whether people will favour a post-Brexit deal will depend on the terms of the deal, and they have yet to be negotiated. Remain is also not an option, obviously, and I wouldn't assume that Remainers will seamlessly become Rejoiners, especially as "Rejoin!" will be seen as a long-term political project, not an immediately-available option.

So I think things will be quite up in the air for a time after Brexit, and it would be a foolish pundit who would nail his colours to the mast of any very specific prediction about how things will turn out.

The mainstream Brexiter position is that the UK will wish to move on to negotiating an FTA with the EU. Delusional bolt-ons to this central idea are (a) the EU will miraculously reassess its priorities and decide that it doesn't need a border guarantee after all; (b) the EU will need this FTA more than the UK does; and (c) this will be quick and easy. But when you dismiss this arrant nonsense the core idea - that the next step is for the UK to seek an EU FTA - is basically correct.

But, even if the UK immediately agree to the EU position on financial settlement, citizens rights, no-hard-border, an FTA is going to take some time to negotiate. So Ireland, and hopefully the EU, will be keen to put in place an interim agreement to operate until the FTA is nailed down. All of which is fine and dandy, but it's conditional on the UK agreeing to the EU position on money, citizens, border. And, having just paid a horrible price for not agreeing to that position, it will be hard for the UK to turn around and immediately agree to it. That would mean they had paid a horrible price for no reason at all, which is a very, very hard thing to face up to.

Well, this is a poll with the Don't Knows (4%) removed:

The UK leaving the EU without a deal: 28%
The UK leaving the EU with a different deal from the one Theresa May has negotiated: 16%
The UK leaving the EU with the deal negotiated by Theresa May: 8%
The UK remaining in the EU: 48%

I have to say, these polls give me some crumbs of comfort.

To your points. If the UK crashes out Oct 31st, all bets are off. I think you're right in that there will be no immediate push to rejoin. Probably,there will political and economic chaos for perhaps 3-10 weeks while the UK scrambles to get some sort of meaningful temporary arrangement/lifeline from the EU. Of course this won't be pleasant for Ireland either.

It's then that the EU will have to play its cards carefully. If they ease the pressure on the UK too much then the spin will be that they have been "faced down" by Johnson and will be seen to be weak. If the EU play hardball, it might not be in its economic or political interests to see a close neighbour and major trading partner collapse. Personalyy, I'd be in favour of hardball.

In that scenario, the HoC will bring the government down. There is no way the Tories will survive a vote of no confidence after a chaotic crash out. Subsequently, I would love to see Johnson and Farage on TV trying to peddle the 2016 lies again and trying to blame the EU yet again. At the very least, it will galvanise the majority who are in favour of Remain or a deal.

Zubeneschamali

Peregrinus wrote: »

It's important not to approach this on the basis that we will grind them beneath our chariot wheels until we hear the lamentations of their women. That would be emotionally satisfying and entirely understandable, but it's probably not the best way to get to where we need to be.

I don't think we should make it a precondition that Boris and Farage wear sackcloth and pour ashes on their heads. I just think we should make it clear that we meant what we said in talks, and the terms of the WA as negotiated will apply to any future agreement.

If that is hard for the PM of the day to agree, not to worry, there will be a new PM along soon. Absolutely no way should the EU reward this sort of bad faith in negotiations in the slightest.

Stop moaning ffs

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

I don't think we should make it a precondition that Boris and Farage wear sackcloth and pour ashes on their heads. I just think we should make it clear that we meant what we said in talks, and the terms of the WA as negotiated will apply to any future agreement.

If that is hard for the PM of the day to agree, not to worry, there will be a new PM along soon. Absolutely no way should the EU reward this sort of bad faith in negotiations in the slightest.

They’ve stated exactly that on several levels and mediums. Any new PM will be dealing with the same deal on the table that May agreed to.
They don’t seem to be listening but they’ll soon have to.
The wording of the climbdown ‘how we have to accept this deal’ from Johnson is all that remains to be heard.

reslfj

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

I must admit that if I were the EUs trade negotiator, I would copy those three paragraphs and tell the UK side that those are a prerequisite for opening talks, that they will be the first three paragraphs of any deal that is agreed with the UK, ever.

Any Free Trade agreed will only begin after Westminster passes those 3 items into law and we see them implementing the backstop on the ground, guaranteeing EU citizens rights and they start paying what they owe.

Free trade will be suspended the day they break any of those conditions.

The EU27 has repeatedly told the UK that the WA text will not change post Brexit except the text on transition periods will be deleted. The ratification of the WA text will be an absolute prerequisite for any EU27 talks with the UK on trade and on non trade.

It may well be that the WA text is put into another form, but the content will not change at all. In addition to the three main points - people, pay and the backstop - there are a few other points in the WA text that will also remain in the text - e.g. Geographical Indications.

After Brexit the EU27 will have plenty of time to wait, while the UK will be in a state of total urgency.

Lars

Zubeneschamali

J Mysterio wrote: »

Eh... I think they need to be an independent nation first..

Why? Just say this:


It is with great regret that we acknowledge the fact that the UK left the Union yesterday. We would like to extend an invitation to all UK citizens to rejoin the EU in future for the benefit of all.


For citizens in Northern Ireland in particular, we have already agreed that Irish Unification would automatically mean you are EU citizens again. We invite citizens of the rest of the United Kingdom to apply rejoin also, whatever other ways the constitutional make up of the current UK may evolve, and we undertake to smooth that process as much as possible.

volchitsa

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

Why? Just say this:


It is with great regret that we acknowledge the fact that the UK left the Union yesterday. We would like to extend an invitation to all UK citizens to rejoin the EU in future for the benefit of all.


For citizens in Northern Ireland in particular, we have already agreed that Irish Unification would automatically mean you are EU citizens again. We invite citizens of the rest of the United Kingdom to apply rejoin also, whatever other ways the constitutional make up of the current UK may evolve, and we undertake to smooth that process as much as possible.

Much as I wish that could happen, with that wording, London could potentially secede and ask to join the EU. Which Barcelona would be very interested to see.

J Mysterio

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

Why? Just say this:


It is with great regret that we acknowledge the fact that the UK left the Union yesterday. We would like to extend an invitation to all UK citizens to rejoin the EU in future for the benefit of all.


For citizens in Northern Ireland in particular, we have already agreed that Irish Unification would automatically mean you are EU citizens again. We invite citizens of the rest of the United Kingdom to apply rejoin also, whatever other ways the constitutional make up of the current UK may evolve, and we undertake to smooth that process as much as possible.

Not appropriate.

If/ once the UK leave, its constituent countries can make their own minds up and ask to rejoin the EU. The party leaders of these countries can surely ask the EU about the practical steps that might be needed in order to join as an independent country, but no way should the EU formally suggest to these countries that they should seek independence.

First Up

If an independent Scotland was joining the EU, the same issues about protecting the Single Market and the EU frontier would arise as with Northern Ireland. Hadrian's Wall no longer exists and I can't see them rebuilding it.

Wouldn't it be fun with Scotland and Ireland in the EU and Northern Ireland and England/Wales outside it. That would be a logistical as well as a cultural challenge.

robinph

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

Why? Just say this:


It is with great regret that we acknowledge the fact that the UK left the Union yesterday. We would like to extend an invitation to all UK citizens to rejoin the EU in future for the benefit of all.


For citizens in Northern Ireland in particular, we have already agreed that Irish Unification would automatically mean you are EU citizens again. We invite citizens of the rest of the United Kingdom to apply rejoin also, whatever other ways the constitutional make up of the current UK may evolve, and we undertake to smooth that process as much as possible.

That is precisely what cannot be said. That is a request from the EU for the UK to break up and they are never, ever going to say that.

The most they will say is the UK is our friend and we look forward to working with them in the future.

robinph

First Up wrote: »

If an independent Scotland was joining the EU, the same issues about protecting the Single Market and the EU frontier would arise as with Northern Ireland. Hadrian's Wall no longer exists and I can't see them rebuilding it.

Far fewer border crossing to deal with, and way less people getting their nickers in a twist about what colour flag or anthem they then have imposed on them.

Bigger issue would be figuring out the definition of Scottish as far as who gets a passport or not.

A Dub in Glasgo

The EU will not say anything unless asked by the UK or by an independent Scotland. One of the unionist arguments in Scotland is that Scotland will not be able to re-join the EU becasue various countries in the EU will veto it. The Scottish Government has previously asked the EU for clarification and the EU has refused to deal with the SG as they deal with the UK Government. The SG asked the UK Government to ask the EU for clarification, the UK Government refused to do this

sink

Peregrinus wrote: »

So Ireland, and hopefully the EU, will be keen to put in place an interim agreement to operate until the FTA is nailed down. All of which is fine and dandy, but it's conditional on the UK agreeing to the EU position on money, citizens, border. And, having just paid a horrible price for not agreeing to that position, it will be hard for the UK to turn around and immediately agree to it. That would mean they had paid a horrible price for no reason at all, which is a very, very hard thing to face up to.

You're assuming that the EU will be negotiating with the same Government. If no deal Brexit happens, I can't see a Boris Johnson led government lasting a fortnight, which then will precipitate a general election. The Conservatives will be fighting an election having just lost a vote of confidence following a catastrophic no-deal exit. Their best polling data only gives them 30% at the moment, I imagine that will slide even more in such a scenario as both the Brexit Party and the Lib Dems gnaw at them from both sides. What government takes shape after the election is anyone's guess, but the likelihood of a government with Conservative majority or DUP support seems remote. Then the arithmetic on the NI backstop changes dramatically.

S.M.B.

Dublin must be open to a last-minute compromise on backstop

The admission by the Government that checks of some kind on cross-border trade will be necessary in a no-deal Brexit is a belated admission of reality. It was camouflaged up to now behind the mantra of a “no hard border” in any circumstances but one of the basic requirements of EU membership has finally been acknowledged.

While the Government should be able to deliver on its pledge not to rebuild infrastructure on the border, some form of checks, particularly for animal and food imports, will be required in the Republic to preserve the EU single market.

A feature of the whole Brexit debacle is the way political rhetoric has propelled all of the main actors into adopting positions that are almost certain to have the opposite effect to the one pursued. The most obvious is the claim by Brexiteers that the UK will be better off outside the EU when there is little doubt that it will cause economic chaos and reduce the living standards of ordinary British people. The impact is likely to be particularly harsh if the country departs without a deal.

The other side of that coin is that the forces in the UK fighting to remain in the EU who ensured the defeat of Theresa May’s withdrawal agreement for a managed departure have brought about a situation in which a chaotic no deal exit is a real possibility.

The big question now is whether all of the various forces are committed to plans of action from which they cannot pull back
Then there is the intense opposition of the Democratic Unionist Party to the Border backstop which the party claims will undermine the union with Britain. By virulently opposing the sensible withdrawal agreement negotiated by May the party has put the union in peril.

The party’s outright rejection of the initial offer of a special arrangement whereby Northern Ireland could avail of the benefits of EU membership while remaining part of the UK made no sense, particularly as the majority of people in the North voted to remain. Having rejected the best of both worlds the DUP now finds itself facing the worst possible outcome – the break up of the UK.

Finally the Irish Government, with the backing of all the main parties in the Dáil, has clung doggedly to the backstop designed to prevent the return of a hard border on the island. The net result of that stance could be the imposition of the kind of border controls the backstop is supposed to prevent.

Decent bit of commentary from the Irish Times today.

https://www.irishtimes.com/opinion/dublin-must-be-open-to-a-last-minute-compromise-on-backstop-1.3952922#.XSbwEwQPLFc.twitter

First Up

robinph wrote:

Far fewer border crossing to deal with, and way less people getting their nickers in a twist about what colour flag or anthem they then have imposed on them.

And its much shorter but it would still beva border.

robinph wrote:

Bigger issue would be figuring out the definition of Scottish as far as who gets a passport or not.

Yes, that would be great fun.

MrMusician18

S.M.B. wrote: »

Decent bit of commentary from the Irish Times today.

https://www.irishtimes.com/opinion/dublin-must-be-open-to-a-last-minute-compromise-on-backstop-1.3952922#.XSbwEwQPLFc.twitter

If Ireland is meant to compromise on the backstop can the author point to a workable alternative solution?

There backstop was the compromise.

Saying that Ireland must compromise to facilitate the UK is essentially saying that Ireland must either agree to a physical border or must extract itself from the single market.

maynooth_rules

We will give way a little on the backstop. The current backstop is a mess. We will agree to go back to the original Northern Ireland backstop. That's it. No time limit, no technology noncense.

trellheim

It could take much longer, and we might have to do quite a bit of lateral thinking to fashion a fig-leaf with which to hide their climbdown.

It's important not to approach this on the basis that we will grind them beneath our chariot wheels until we hear the lamentations of their women. That would be emotionally satisfying and entirely understandable, but it's probably not the best way to get to where we need to b

See my proposal re Silicon Drogheda ( or more interestingly Silicon Newry ) made only half in jest . The NI trade numbers are awful with no possible way of getting them pumped, a border which we will have to erect means we are very probably going to have to do some sort of economic refugee stuff to avoid some sort of economic collapse up there as if farming goes as well its utter basket case stuff ..... get them to ask for economic asylum

Christy42

S.M.B. wrote: »

Decent bit of commentary from the Irish Times today.

https://www.irishtimes.com/opinion/dublin-must-be-open-to-a-last-minute-compromise-on-backstop-1.3952922#.XSbwEwQPLFc.twitter

What possible compromise?!? Nothing is being offered and nothing of merit has been suggested by the UK. I don't see the point in speculating about what Dublin should do if the UK finds a unicorn.

As it stands compromise on the backstop would be agreeing to a hard border because we don't want a hard border. Rather self defeating.

MrMusician18

Christy42 wrote: »

What possible compromise?!? Nothing is being offered and nothing of merit has been suggested by the UK. I don't see the point in speculating about what Dublin should do if the UK finds a unicorn.

As it stands compromise on the backstop would be agreeing to a hard border because we don't want a hard border. Rather self defeating.

It's actually a ridiculous article. He says that because the DUP won't compromise, the Irish government must. And since no realistic alternative exists, the undefined "compromise" will be detrimental to the Irish national interest.

Now forgive me, but the DUP are only a bit player in this and they cannot dictate terms to other governments.

A Dub in Glasgo

S.M.B. wrote: »

Decent bit of commentary from the Irish Times today.

https://www.irishtimes.com/opinion/dublin-must-be-open-to-a-last-minute-compromise-on-backstop-1.3952922#.XSbwEwQPLFc.twitter

Why is it decent?

The EU holding firm on the need for the backstop and this commentary says Ireland must compromise....

Stop moaning ffs

It has been pointed out by many that of the backstop wasn’t the issue, even if we ‘compromised’ it would quickly be something else the matter.
That’s how they’ve been doing this whole thing. Ineptitude and exceptionalism

Professor Moriarty

MrMusician18 wrote: »

It's actually a ridiculous article. He says that because the DUP won't compromise, the Irish government must. And since no realistic alternative exists, the undefined "compromise" will be detrimental to the Irish national interest.

Now forgive me, but the DUP are only a bit player in this and they cannot dictate terms to other governments.

Just to play Devil's advocate. Rather than sticking it to the Brits or not wanting to be seen as giving in, what's the harm in taking a pragmatic approach. How about saying okay to, say, a time limited backstop of ten years? The global, European and British political landscape will have completely changed by then. Would it be in our interest to simply get out of the way just right now? I have no doubt that this would completely wrong foot Johnson, the DUP and their ERG pals.

lawred2

S.M.B. wrote: »

Decent bit of commentary from the Irish Times today.

https://www.irishtimes.com/opinion/dublin-must-be-open-to-a-last-minute-compromise-on-backstop-1.3952922#.XSbwEwQPLFc.twitter

¯\_(ツ)_/¯

What compromise exactly? This is just more Brexiteer type talk.

MrMusician18

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

Just to play Devil's advocate. Rather than sticking it to the Brits or not wanting to be seen as giving in, what's the harm in taking a pragmatic approach. How about saying okay to, say, a time limited backstop of ten years? The global, European and British political landscape will have completely changed by then. Would it be in our interest to simply get out of the way just right now? I have no doubt that this would completely wrong foot Johnson, the DUP and their ERG pals.

One only has to look at Hong Kong to see how little can change over long periods. When the UK agreed that 50 year plan for HK in the mid 80s China appeared at the time to be beginning to set out on a road to democracy.

Now look where they are. A time limit of any length is not in the national interest. 10 years would be considered too long by the brexiters anyway and the technology they talk of is such pie in the sky stuff it will likely never exist.

maynooth_rules

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

Just to play Devil's advocate. Rather than sticking it to the Brits or not wanting to be seen as giving in, what's the harm in taking a pragmatic approach. How about saying okay to, say, a time limited backstop of ten years? The global, European and British political landscape will have completely changed by then. Would it be in our interest to simply get out of the way just right now? I have no doubt that this would completely wrong foot Johnson, the DUP and their ERG pals.

It would be a death sentence to Fine Gael, and would be pushed as a victory for Boris by the British press over the difficult paddies.

Professor Moriarty

MrMusician18 wrote: »

One only has to look at Hong Kong to see how little can change over long periods. When the UK agreed that 50 year plan for HK in the mid 80s China appeared at the time to be beginning to set out on a road to democracy.

Now look where they are. A time limit of any length is not in the national interest. 10 years would be considered too long by the brexiters anyway and the technology they talk of is such pie in the sky stuff it will likely never exist.

Well if it's not accepted then we will have been seen to have tried by all concerned. Personally, I think it's meaningless because the likes of Johnson would break any treaty if it suits them - as your Hong Kong example illustrates. I'm ambivalent as to how important it is. I think pragmatism should rule how we proceed. Who cares what they think and how they portray Ireland in the Tory press? Once the backstop is removed, they'll move on to blame Macron, Merkel, von der Leyen, Beethoven....