Brexit discussion thread IX (Please read OP before posting)

lawred2

Tell me how wrote: »

I'd like to hear who advised him to wave a kipper around last week and talk about EU rules when the law he was referring to is a UK government one.

He knows well that it doesn't matter if he's wrong. The target audience won't check to even verify if he's right.. they'll just readily accept it because that's what they want to believe. Sure lies about the EU is his stock in trade.

declanflynn

Can Brexit be achieved quiet easily by throwing arylene and her gang under the bus ?

VinLieger

Tell me how wrote: »

I'd like to hear who advised him to wave a kipper around last week and talk about EU rules when the law he was referring to is a UK government one.

Theres a suspicion it was another attempt at engineering google results much like the whole "i make buses" farce.

Kippers in this case is to do with distancing himself from a story about Ukippers apparently, much like the buses thing was an attempt to push the 350 mil bus off the top of results.

Tell me how

lawred2 wrote: »

He knows well that it doesn't matter if he's wrong. The target audience won't check to even verify if he's right.. they'll just readily accept it because that's what they want to believe. Sure lies about the EU is his stock in trade.

I think we are at the level now (election for PM effectively who must deliver Brexit) that if you think it is just your base who are paying attention to what they are hearing and seeing, it again is indicative or either poor advice or stupidity or both.

If he went on with that nonsense at a GE it might be a strategic level but here and now, it is embarrassing. Or it should be.

Capt'n Midnight

J Mysterio wrote: »

Boris Johnson: Fit To Be Prime Minister? on Channel now

Unlike the BBC's Brexit doc this one will be shown more than once.

On Channel 4 +1 at midnight

And tomorrow night 00:05 on 4seven

Itssoeasy

declanflynn wrote: »

Can Brexit be achieved quiet easily by throwing arylene and her gang under the bus ?

Well the DUP are kept Theresa May in power and unless something has changed that I'm not aware of then if the conservatives don't have a confidence and supply agreement then Johnson wouldn't command a majority of the House of Commons then the government could fall.

BobbyBobberson

Just switched on, the conservative party conference piece really is something.

ancapailldorcha

Posts with insults deleted.

reslfj

LeinsterDub wrote: »

Leroy42 wrote: »

There is nothing stopping the UK leaving next week.

Legally I mean?

There is nothing stopping any country leaving tomorrow if that want.

No EU member state can leave the EU without a deal before the two years mentioned in A50 has passed or an agreed A50 extension has passed.

Lars

traco

In terms of sitting days isn't conference season going to impact also from mid Sept -early Oct? Summer recess starts Thursday I think until early Sept so that doesn't leave a whole lot of debating time or even the opportunity to pass the legislation which I think they need to have in place for themselves even for a hard crash out on Oct 31??

Hunt now going to EU for support on policing shipping in the Hormuz straits as big Donnie gave them the flick. Johnson is going to be squeezed hard from noon tomorrow. I imagine we will see the silly clown grin disappear very quickly in the coming days when reality really starts to hit home.

LeinsterDub

declanflynn wrote: »

Can Brexit be achieved quiet easily by throwing arylene and her gang under the bus ?

Only by forming a unity government with Labour which won't happen

ThePanjandrum

20silkcut wrote: »

What will they do to pressure Varadkar??

As Leo says himself he is the EU.
The EU is him.

I thought you claimed to be an independent nation. Did no-one tell Leo?

BobbyBobberson

Just catching up on last weeks Brexit Panorama programme, really good viewing.

beggars_bush

It'll be a few months of talking the UK up, then GE

Capt'n Midnight

May has had a huge turnover in cabinet posts

So Boris will have fun setting up a cabinet given the divisions in the party and the remaining talent available.

From the third episode of Yes Minister 1980

But they are the people's representatives, democratically chosen.

MP's aren't chosen by the people, but by their local party.
35 men in grubby raincoats or 35 women in silly hats.

But the government are selected from the best of them.

Bernard, there are only 630 MP's.
If one party has just over 300 it forms a government.
Of that 300, one hundred are too old and too silly, one hundred too young and too callow which leaves just about a hundred MP's to fill one hundred governmental posts.
There's no choice at all.
They've had no selection, no training.

J Mysterio

Absolutely fascinating to see an exhausted Rory Stewart contemplating a Johnson government here.

https://twitter.com/brexit_sham/status/1153252750232367105
I'm sure he still has a bright political future, but this is a man who looks weary and worn out by the Brexit madness.

BobbyBobberson

BobbyBobberson wrote: »

Just catching up on last weeks Brexit Panorama programme, really good viewing.

My good god, the David David footage is incredible. The lack of self awareness is astonishing.

Peregrinus

ThePanjandrum wrote: »

I thought you claimed to be an independent nation. Did no-one tell Leo?

We are an independent nation. Ireland is independent within the EU, as opposed to Northern Ireland which is dependent within the UK. The comparison is instructive.

fash

Peregrinus wrote: »

We are an independent nation. Ireland is independent within the EU, as opposed to Northern Ireland which is dependent within the UK. The comparison is instructive.

I believe the current GDP difference between the 2 is "the United States compared to Mexico" - and growing in Ireland's favour.

IAmTheReign

trellheim wrote: »

Does anyone have examples of the EU backing down ? Norway ? Switzerland ? anybody ?

Presumably the UK know this.

Therefore I expect huge pressure almost immediately on Leo to cave on something, anything to have something they can trumpet.

Since David Davis has almost publicly said that the negotiating gloves are going to come off - not sure what that means but judge for yourself

None whatsoever. In fact had they done any research the Swiss immigration referendum in 2014 would have shown them exactly what to expect. The Swiss voted to end free movement and were told by the EU that if they did they would lose single market access and that all bilateral agreements between Switzerland and the EU would be terminated. The Swiss government were forced into a fairly embarrassing climbdown after years of failed negotiations. I'd say there's quite a few in Brussels who are hoping that the British will do the same but it's looking increasingly unlikely to happen.

McGiver

Nody wrote:

Now I do believe that some really want that but it's for more personal reasons (i.e. vulture funds offering lucrative jobs after they leave etc. as a return for the faovur) but they can't really state "I want to UK to crash out so I can make millions" as an argument for such a stand.

I think the ones with financial interests are a tiny minority. Most of the ultra Brexiteers are nothing but deluded and really want no deal, no FTA and even destruction of the EU as a whole. That's not going to change, I'm afraid. They deny facts and reality, and when facing the cliff edge on 31st October they'll choose to believe the nonsense and won't suddenly accept any facts and methodologically sound predictions from BoE, basically all reputable economists, IMF, WB, EU or any other expert.

And I think significant part of them would deny reality even after the crash out with the help of gutter press and charlatan politicians, so I see UK reapplying as very unlikely, especially if UK economically gravitates towards the US. You would need at least 10% swing to the Remain side and a politically engaged population which just isn't there (and in fact is one of the causes of Brexit), plus even the Remain side is to a high degree lukewarm pro-EU at best, even they are affected by the sort of an exceptionalism. We hear "Remain and Reform", do you seriously think that after crashing out, reapplying, getting into the EU, anyone would take them seriously and let them drive any reform with their track record?

UK: No deal!
EU: OK, bye.
UK: We don't need you! You need us.
UK: erm... Can we reapply?
EU: Sure, sign here.
UK: Signed. We want a Reform!
EU: Right...but what's the reform?
UK: UK to be the boss, of course.
EU: No, thanks

leitrim4life

IAmTheReign wrote: »

None whatsoever. In fact had they done any research the Swiss immigration referendum in 2014 would have shown them exactly what to expect. The Swiss voted to end free movement and were told by the EU that if they did they would lose single market access and that all bilateral agreements between Switzerland and the EU would be terminated. The Swiss government were forced into a fairly embarrassing climbdown after years of failed negotiations. I'd say there's quite a few in Brussels who are hoping that the British will do the same but it's looking increasingly unlikely to happen.

The EU allowed Swiss to ring fence areas where unemployment was higher than Swiss average, thus effectively excluding EU citizens from getting jobs in those areas it would be like us ringfencing Mayo and telling rest of EU you can get work in any county but Mayo.

Nody

leitrim4life wrote: »

The EU allowed Swiss to ring fence areas where unemployment was higher than Swiss average, thus effectively excluding EU citizens from getting jobs in those areas it would be like us ringfencing Mayo and telling rest of EU you can get work in any county but Mayo.

Not even close; what the law states is:

Under the rules, firms will be legally required to advertise open positions in occupations with high unemployment via regional unemployment (RAV/ORP) offices for five working days before they are advertised publicly.

The so-called ‘job registration requirement’ will initially affect occupations with an unemployment level of 8 percent and over. As of 2020, that figure will drop to 5 percent.

There are 19 occupations currently affected including warehouse workers, kitchen staff and marketing professionals, among others.

Vacancies for these occupations will have to be published exclusively on an online portal that can only be accessed by people officially registered as unemployed in Switzerland.

That's it; nothing else. They can still hire a non Swiss person without any problem; they simply need to wait a bit longer to make it public that they are looking to hire and that's it. There is zero requirement to hire Swiss first but employments groups with high unemployment will get a chance to get their CVs in first to the companies.

Zubeneschamali

IAmTheReign wrote: »

I'd say there's quite a few in Brussels who are hoping that the British will do the same but it's looking increasingly unlikely to happen.

Everyone sensible hopes Brexit will never happen, but there is an upside for the EU to a hard Brexit - it will be an utter shambles for the UK and a very clear demonstration to all leavers/nationalists/chancers that EU membership is really valuable.

leitrim4life

Nody wrote: »

Not even close; what the law states is:
That's it; nothing else. They can still hire a non Swiss person without any problem; they simply need to wait a bit longer to make it public that they are looking to hire and that's it. There is zero requirement to hire Swiss first but employments groups with high unemployment will get a chance to get their CVs in first to the companies.

Seems to me that locals get a distinct 5 day advantage, https://www.youtube.com/embed/T3-UlSe-AqM

Leroy42

Doesn't the recent vote in the HoC, coupled with the increasing number of Tory MPs saying they cannot support No Deal mean that the real centre of crisis is the UK rather than the EU?

It continues to surprise me that people like IDS are allowed parrot the line that the EU will have when all the politics points to Johnson having to adjust.

On the likes of Brexitcast they continually claim that the EU could move (and of course there is always the possibility they might) but never seem to reflect on the actual political situation in the UK.

20silkcut

McGiver wrote: »

I think the ones with financial interests are a tiny minority. Most of the ultra Brexiteers are nothing but deluded and really want no deal, no FTA and even destruction of the EU as a whole. That's not going to change, I'm afraid. They deny facts and reality, and when facing the cliff edge on 31st October they'll choose to believe the nonsense and won't suddenly accept any facts and methodologically sound predictions from BoE, basically all reputable economists, IMF, WB, EU or any other expert.

And I think significant part of them would deny reality even after the crash out with the help of gutter press and charlatan politicians, so I see UK reapplying as very unlikely, especially if UK economically gravitates towards the US. You would need at least 10% swing to the Remain side and a politically engaged population which just isn't there (and in fact is one of the causes of Brexit), plus even the Remain side is to a high degree lukewarm pro-EU at best, even they are affected by the sort of an exceptionalism. We hear "Remain and Reform", do you seriously think that after crashing out, reapplying, getting into the EU, anyone would take them seriously and let them drive any reform with their track record?

UK: No deal!
EU: OK, bye.
UK: We don't need you! You need us.
UK: erm... Can we reapply?
EU: Sure, sign here.
UK: Signed. We want a Reform!
EU: Right...but what's the reform?
UK: UK to be the boss, of course.
EU: No, thanks

That’s why I think any second referendum should be just on the no deal issue. That is the biggest issue. And the original vote is still respected.

They should be asked :
Do you wish that the Uk exit the Eu without an agreement?

Yes/no

Surely the vast majority could be trusted to understand that question.
If so, No would probably win. Then there is a mandate to revoke article 50. Start a debate about what they want over a longer time period without an insane hard deadline. And then trigger article 50 again when they clearly know and have a clear road map to what it is they want.

If on the other hand, yes wins then so be it at least all doubt is removed about the will of the people.

Peregrinus

20silkcut wrote: »

That’s why I think any second referendum should be just on the no deal issue. That is the biggest issue. And the original vote is still respected.

They should be asked :
Do you wish that the Uk exit the Eu without an agreement?

Yes/no

Surely the vast majority could be trusted to understand that question.
If so No would probably win. Then there is a mandate to revoke article 50. Start a debate about what they want over a longer time period without an insane hard deadline. And then trigger article 50 again when they clearly know what it is they want.

If yes wins then so be it at least all doubt is removed about the will of the people.

A "no" vote doesn't create a mandate to revoke. All it tells you is that the majority does not want to leave with no agreement; it tells you nothing about what they do want. They might, for example, want to leave on the terms of the WA as negotiated. Or on some yet softer terms that are readily negotiable, if only the UK modifies its red lines.

If you want a mandate to revoke Article 50, seek a mandate to revoke article 50.

Tell me how

Leroy42 wrote: »

Doesn't the recent vote in the HoC, coupled with the increasing number of Tory MPs saying they cannot support No Deal mean that the real centre of crisis is the UK rather than the EU?

It continues to surprise me that people like IDS are allowed parrot the line that the EU will have when all the politics points to Johnson having to adjust.

On the likes of Brexitcast they continually claim that the EU could move (and of course there is always the possibility they might) but never seem to reflect on the actual political situation in the UK.

Because UK participants (and in many cases commentators (Leave and remain)) have allowed themselves to transition into saying more often what they want to happen as opposed to what they think will happen.

Leroy42

But No Deal was never the will of the people. It was never suggested. By no one at all.

So why should No Deal be afforded this level of official acceptance? If the will is to be respected then surely the deal must be the only option (if only one option to be voted on/).

The WA meets all the criteria of the ref. End FoM, leave EU, end annual payments, leave ECJ.

No Deal has been dreamt up by those that can see that any deal is clearly worse than EU membership and so won't to torch the whole lot rather than face the truth