Brexit discussion thread IX (Please read OP before posting)

Laois_Man

Headshot wrote: »

You would expect Labour to be in the Greens/Lib Dems coalition, specially as most of Labour party members want to say in Europe.

I'm currently watching Britains Brexit Crisis, it's a fascinating watch. I hatred for Brexiters such as Raab continue to grow though, the man is up there with Boris in talking out of his ass.

I wonder though should've May threaten to call another GE when Foster and her cohorts said No to the backstop, it could of been the perfect opportunity to force the DUP to stand down.

You could say the DUP are the main reason why England are still in Europe which in itself is quite funny

What would have been the difference to the DUP between standing down and having a GE? They were never going to stand down!

Headshot

Laois_Man wrote: »

What would have been the difference to the DUP between standing down and having a GE? They were never going to stand down!

Right now they have so much power and if a GE happened they wouldnt be the king maker any more

They've played all their cards and the Brexiters cannot stand them.

Laois_Man

Headshot wrote: »

Right now they have so much power and if a GE happened they wouldnt be the king maker any more

They've played all their cards and the Brexiters cannot stand them.

If they stood down they wouldn’t be the king makers either.

Safeguarding NIs status in the Kingdom is their only concern

54and56

Just watched the Panorama documentary and my main take away is that I'm seriously glad Martin Selmayr is on our side if this!! He is a serious operator who can clearly buy and sell anyone the UK Govt throw at the EU.

My secondary take away is that the UK has fallen into the trap of believing it's own BS and that is about to be debunked on a scale never before seen in history which is quite sad for a once great country.

J Mysterio

First Up wrote: »

The fact that the front runner for PM - who has based his entire strategy on Brexit - could make such a blunder tells you all you need to know about the state of the Tory party. Not only was he able to make this hilarious mistake, there was nobody advising him who knew enough to know that he had it ars*ways.

And yet there are saps who believe this idiot can rescue the UK from a disaster created by people just like him.

Combine that with paragraph 5c. All in a few days.

Beechwoodspark

Mr.Nice Guy wrote: »

Yeah we saw that in the documentary about having Barnier sit in that old chair in London. Davis memorised his lines whereas Barnier read from his papers. They thought this made Davis look the more accomplished performer. All about style over substance.

In reality Barnier is ten times the operator Davis is and you get the feeling watching that documentary that deep down Davis knows it.

Very true.

That little stunt was all about optics and says a lot about Davis and the UK if that was what they were prioritising.

ECO_Mental

Beechwoodspark wrote: »

Very true.

That little stunt was all about optics and says a lot about Davis and the UK if that was what they were prioritising.

Saw the doc as well and was very good, the English lads will say that Barnier also pulled a stunt on them on day one! where they rocked up for a photo call and didn't have a scrap of paper in front of them and the EU lads had reams of paper....the optics went down hill from there for the UK that they weren't prepared, weren't taking it seriously etc etc. Davis stunt I dont even remembering that happening but EVERYBODY remembers Davis sitting at a table with nothing in front of him.

mickoneill31

I thought the Panorama doc didn't really give anything earth shattering. It's all stuff we knew. But the bit about the EU negotiators expecting the UK to have a great plan and their realisation that they didn't was interesting. I kind of thought that initially too. I saw the posturing in the early days and thought it was step 1, not the entire plan.
And that doesn't seem to have moved on with the future PM waving around a kipper blaming the EU for a rule he thinks is daft and then finding out it's a British rule. I'm sure the EU commission is shaking in their boots at scenes like that. Unless the cunning plan is to make the EU believe that the UK is incompetent and that they need to be saved from themselves.

I thought that Hammond stating that triggering article 50 without a plan was the wrong thing to do "with the benefit of hindsight" was depressing. No **** sherlock. You needed hindsight for that? How about using the benefit of common sense.

Also David Davis saying that the UK failed because they weren't confident enough while he was chuckling away showed his competence. This was the guy talking about the "easiest deal in history". I think the UK may have been a smidge too confident heading into the negotiations. And that doesn't seem to have gone away.

First Up

mickoneill31 wrote:

I thought the Panorama doc didn't really give anything earth shattering. It's all stuff we knew.

It was stuff you knew, if you had an understanding of how the EU is structured and operates.

It would have been jaw-droppingly new for many in the UK who get their knowledge of the EU from the Daily Express and Daily Mail.

It might finally be dawning on some that not only is this not a game, they are dealing with serious, competent people.

Some uneasy shifting in seats perhaps, along with the belicose flag waving.

lawred2

First Up wrote: »

It was stuff you knew, if you had an understanding of how the EU is structured and operates.

It would have been jaw-droppingly new for many in the UK who get their knowledge of the EU from the Daily Express and Daily Mail.

It might finally be dawning on some that not only is this not a game, they are dealing with serious, competent people.

Some uneasy shifting in seats perhaps, along with the belicose flag waving.

or they would have simply changed the channel...

First Up

lawred2 wrote:

or they would have simply changed the channel...

No doubt some did. Love Island is what its all about after all.

mickoneill31

First Up wrote: »

It was stuff you knew, if you had an understanding of how the EU is structured and operates.

It would have been jaw-droppingly new for many in the UK who get their knowledge of the EU from the Daily Express and Daily Mail.

It might finally be dawning on some that not only is this not a game, they are dealing with serious, competent people.

Some uneasy shifting in seats perhaps, along with the belicose flag waving.

Yeah, I was writing that from an Irish perspective
I'd imagine if you were a Brexiter you'd probably have thought the UK politicians were talking sense and the EU had bullied the UK.

Peregrinus

mickoneill31 wrote: »

I'd imagine if you were a Brexiter you'd probably have thought . . .

I think I may have spotted the flaw in your thinking.

Tell me how

First Up wrote: »

It was stuff you knew, if you had an understanding of how the EU is structured and operates.

It would have been jaw-droppingly new for many in the UK who get their knowledge of the EU from the Daily Express and Daily Mail.

It might finally be dawning on some that not only is this not a game, they are dealing with serious, competent people.

Some uneasy shifting in seats perhaps, along with the belicose flag waving.

The Brexiteers did not watch it.

Hope Goggle Box featured it for their participants.

If there's proof of this, f*ck him and his Tory members if they elect him from a height. (Apologies for the unparliamentary language, but it did rile me up)

"As for Ireland's prime minister, Leo Varadkar, 'Why isn't he called Murphy like all the rest of them',"

https://www.businessinsider.com/boris-johnson-angela-merkel-stasi-leo-varadkar-murphy-comments-brexit-2019-7?r=US&IR=T

Stop moaning ffs

Brilliant and frightening take down of Johnson by Fintan O Toole.
Well worth a read. Frightening in that it shows just how much of a blustering chancer Johnson is. Among other things

https://t.co/5mXG9ftHXz?amp=1

Leroy42

One thing I did get from the program last night is that the UK really do feel that since they don't like the deal on offer (it has no chance of getting through parliament) then it is incumbent on the EU to change the deal. But they have offered nothing to the EU to help.

They don't have any understanding of the compromises that the EU have already done and the issue being totally their creation.

It was stated a number of times how furious TM was that the EU was not doing more to help her. So taking back control, them needing us more than we need them and changed into "please help me". All the steeliness and bluster and No Deal better than a Bad deal, Red white and blue brexit and other such nonsense was now replaced with pleas to be nicer and think of poor old TM. I remember that speech after Salzberg, I remember it as one of the most cringeworthy speeches ever given by a politician. Basically asking the nation to get behind her as the EU were being really rude to her and she had no ability to deal with it herself.

Davis came across as a right prat. He failed completely in his job, even having his staff try to manufacture a situation whereby he could look vaguely professional against the far more polished and seemingly far more prepared, Barnier. Did they redouble their efforts to get ahead of the game, did they make sure to be prepared and look to catch up? No, they sat him on a chair and tried to make him look bad!

In terms of the impact, one only has to look at the Express for the result. It was all totally biased from the BBC, pro-EU the whole way and not giving the Brexiteers a fair shake.

trellheim

One thing I did get from the program last night is that the UK really do feel that since they don't like the deal on offer (it has no chance of getting through parliament) then it is incumbent on the EU to change the deal. But they have offered nothing to the EU to help.

They don't have any understanding of the compromises that the EU have already done and the issue being totally their creation.

It was stated a number of times how furious TM was that the EU was not doing more to help her. So taking back control, them needing us more than we need them and changed into "please help me". All the steeliness and bluster and No Deal better than a Bad deal, Red white and blue brexit and other such nonsense was now replaced with pleas to be nicer and think of poor old TM. I remember that speech after Salzberg, I remember it as one of the most cringeworthy speeches ever given by a politician. Basically asking the nation to get behind her as the EU were being really rude to her and she had no ability to deal with it herself.

Davis came across as a right prat. He failed completely in his job, even having his staff try to manufacture a situation whereby he could look vaguely professional against the far more polished and seemingly far more prepared, Barnier. Did they redouble their efforts to get ahead of the game, did they make sure to be prepared and look to catch up? No, they sat him on a chair and tried to make him look bad!

In terms of the impact, one only has to look at the Express for the result. It was all totally biased from the BBC, pro-EU the whole way and not giving the Brexiteers a fair shake.

Thatcher knew well how the EU operated, marched in and got a rebate in 1984 because she could prove their VAT contributions were far higher than the rest.

The difference in operation between then and now is shocking ; Ivan Rogers got the boot because he spoke the truth, and Olly Robbins is about to get gone .

Be interesting to see how the prince of darkness Gavin Williamson can affect any change here.

Leroy42

One other thing, the WA agreement is 555 pages long. Johnson is saying, and his supporters seem to agree, that they can simply ditch that and the 18 months of work that went into it and get it all done in a matter of days.

All that and with no actual idea of what to replace to bits they don't like (namely the backstop) but that somehow they will not only present this to the EU but that the EU will accept it all within a few days.

Another point, Raab's line about Win-Win. Clearly the UK need a win out of this. But the EU don't 'need' a win. A win for the EU is for the UK to stay. Anything less than that is a lose to the EU. So what incentive have the EU to make it a Win-Lose? The UK seem to think that a win for the EU is the same as a win for them when it clearly is not.

Tell me how

What's best for the EU at this point?

A - Is it a climb down by the UK and revocation of A50?
B - Is it that they leave with agreed deal?
C - Or leave with No Deal?

While I can see the obvious benefit of A, I think it would embolden nationalists in UK and other countries that the EU is now too powerful and they may resort to more draconian methods to get their country to leave in future.

I think B, with UK then seeking to return after a period would strengthen the EU project with minimal (although not insignificant) difficulties before they do so.

C is not good for anyone.

quokula

Tell me how wrote: »

What's best for the EU at this point?

A - Is it a climb down by the UK and revocation of A50?
B - Is it that they leave with agreed deal?
C - Or leave with No Deal?

While I can see the obvious benefit of A, I think it would embolden nationalists in UK and other countries that the EU is now too powerful and they may resort to more draconian methods to get their country to leave in future.

I think B, with UK then seeking to return after a period would strengthen the EU project with minimal (although not insignificant) difficulties before they do so.

C is not good for anyone.

Part of me thinks C, for all the pain it brings, is the only way the UK will learn. A and even B (which would only be the start of the real negotiation) will just strengthen and embolden the likes of Farage and turn the country into even more of a mess.

First Up

Leroy42 wrote:

The UK seem to think that a win for the EU is the same as a win for them when it clearly is not.

Bits of it could be - the negotiated Withdrawal Agreement was a genuine effort to meet everyone's needs. A dysfunctional and economically straitened UK is in nobody's interest.

But the EU's priority is the stability and prosperity of the union of 27 member states. If it comes to a choice between the interests of the EU and UK, there is only one winner.

Tell me how

quokula wrote: »

Part of me thinks C, for all the pain it brings, is the only way the UK will learn. A and even B (which would only be the start of the real negotiation) will just strengthen and embolden the likes of Farage and turn the country into even more of a mess.

My feeling with C is that pressure will be out on EU to be favourable practically on humanitarian grounds and that if things aren't very painful for the UK, they will say they are happy with their choice and will advocate for others to leave and join them.

Leroy42

Tell me how wrote: »

What's best for the EU at this point?

A - Is it a climb down by the UK and revocation of A50?
B - Is it that they leave with agreed deal?
C - Or leave with No Deal?

While I can see the obvious benefit of A, I think it would embolden nationalists in UK and other countries that the EU is now too powerful and they may resort to more draconian methods to get their country to leave in future.

I think B, with UK then seeking to return after a period would strengthen the EU project with minimal (although not insignificant) difficulties before they do so.

C is not good for anyone.

But none of that is in the hands of the EU. The UK made their ref choice, they want to 'take back control' but apparently it is down to the EU to decide.

Those 3 options are what are on offer. A) is politically impossible and I agree would bring up serious long term issues on both UK and the EU.
is apparently not good enough
C) is what Johnson is happy enough to opt for.

But at no stage is this a EU decision. The EU have made an agreement based on the two positions. That people like Raab etc don't like it means that they are removing option .

Doesn't change the rest of the dynamics

Stop moaning ffs

If Johnson is insisting leaving with no deal, and it happens, how long will he be around for when the consequences start kicking in? Calais will be first to manifest as a massive problem.
Surely he and the Tories get savaged at the next election? Or will we see one before Oct 31st?

seamus

Tell me how wrote: »

While I can see the obvious benefit of A, I think it would embolden nationalists in UK and other countries that the EU is now too powerful and they may resort to more draconian methods to get their country to leave in future.

Or...it might be a wake up call for democracy in the UK and the majority will realise how their apathy nearly allowed the racists and the wealthy sociopaths to seize control and ruin the country.

A general election at this point would be the ruination of the Tories. They don't have a majority mandate to drag the UK out of the EU. Those willing to continue to back Brexit are a distinct minority and are shrinking month-by-month.

54and56

Interesting intervention by Angela Merkel - https://www.rte.ie/news/europe/2019/0719/1064029-merkel-irish-border-comment/

"The Withdrawal Agreement is the Withdrawal Agreement," Ms Merkel told a news conference.

"But the moment that a solution for the management of the border is found in (the declaration on) the future relationship - so for the European Union's future ties to Britain - which basically squares the circle - on the one hand I have no physical border but on the other hand the EU Single Market ends - that satisfies both questions, then the backstop will be overwritten, so to speak."

Ms Merkel added: "This means the task is to draft future relations that way and perhaps to draft them more specifically and better and more precisely than so far."

Is she simply stating the obvious or opening the door for Boris to find a way to let the WA pass the HoC?

joeysoap

If UK revoked article 50, given how bad Corbyn is, it would result in Farage looking for a GE and winning hundreds of seats, and a wipeout of the Tory party. Party before country, they’ll not revoke.

nc6000

Leroy42 wrote:

I remember that speech after Salzberg, I remember it as one of the most cringeworthy speeches ever given by a politician. Basically asking the nation to get behind her as the EU were being really rude to her and she had no ability to deal with it herself.

Yes, it was a pretty cringeworthy speech alright but I don't think Tusk teasing her about cherries on Twitter or Juncker and his nebulous comment were especially helpful either.

Tell me how

Leroy42 wrote: »

But none of that is in the hands of the EU. The UK made their ref choice, they want to 'take back control' but apparently it is down to the EU to decide.

Those 3 options are what are on offer. A) is politically impossible and I agree would bring up serious long term issues on both UK and the EU.
is apparently not good enough
C) is what Johnson is happy enough to opt for.

But at no stage is this a EU decision. The EU have made an agreement based on the two positions. That people like Raab etc don't like it means that they are removing option .

Doesn't change the rest of the dynamics

I'm not suggesting it is for the EU to decide. I'm wondering which would be best for the societies within the EU as a whole. Including the UK and other countries.

In 12 or 24 months, all countries will still exist (hopefully), what is the best path it a safe and prosperous society for all at that time.