Brexit discussion thread IX (Please read OP before posting)

Seth Brundle

brickster69 wrote: »

Ambro. The withdrawal agreement is dead. It has been rejected 3 times by a remain majority parliament. No good saying sign it or else !

Looks like the EU have to come out and say negotiations have failed and are finished in that case.

The EU don't have to come out and say anything!
There has only been one set of negotiations to avoid the default no-deal exit by the UK from the EU. These were agreed by both negotiating parties (including current members of the UK cabinet).
Then the UK parliamemt rejected the deal agreed between the UK government and the EU.
Fine.
But since then neither the UK government or the UK parliament have offered any alternatives.
Why should the EU be the ones to now come out and make a statement on what has failed?

In reality the UK has failed but diplomacy won't allow that to be said!

First Up

beggars_bush wrote:

You cannot yearn for a return of The Empire, when all the peoples from the countries you subjugated followed you home; and then you complain about them

Perhaps but the point is that Brexit has no affect on immigration from the UK's former colonies.

brickster69

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

. All the EU can do now is wait while the UK continues to squabble with and tear at itself until the inevitable request for an extension.

Yep, it looks that way.

trellheim

Because the media is rabidly in favor of Brexit. Anything from the BBC, Guardian, Economist, FT, etc which doesn't affirm that Brexit will be unicorns and rainbows will just be derided as fake news.

Notice how the narrative shifted from Brexit being amazing to a duty that must be followed because people voted for it. Now we're at the stage where the Brexit press is incessantly playing the victim card. So much for buccaneering, global Britain...

The media is not aimed at us - it is aimed precisely at the British Public as a particular narrative shaped by Cummings etc to a particular end . The question is a 'cui bono' one whenever you see a Mail/Telegraph headline etc

It is mostly designed to aid the Tory party's survival

As to the question above . The backstop is merely the most obvious thing to rail against ; several ERG types have said that the whole WA should be torn up , ECJ oversight is anathema to them . My point is that if they dropped the backstop, some other unacceptable item in the WA would immediately be found to have a crisis over ; thus there is no point in entering negotiations.

Limpy

The EU will give the tories all the time they need to save themselves. Or untill someone other then Corbyn can become PM

trellheim

Limpy wrote: »

The EU will give the tories all the time they need to save themselves. Or untill someone other then Corbyn can become PM

You might think that but the issue is Johnson has to publicly ask for an extension which breaks his main election manifesto of 'Out on Oct 31' . As he is a serial liar and changer of position I can see him doing this personally but not with the Brexit party on the horizon .

prawnsambo

brickster69 wrote: »

Ambro. The withdrawal agreement is dead. It has been rejected 3 times by a remain majority parliament. No good saying sign it or else !

Looks like the EU have to come out and say negotiations have failed and are finished in that case.

For a dead agreement, the UK seem to be keeping it alive through interminable extension requests.

ancapailldorcha

trellheim wrote: »

You might think that but the issue is Johnson has to publicly ask for an extension which breaks his main election manifesto of 'Out on Oct 31' . As he is a serial liar and changer of position I can see him doing this personally but not with the Brexit party on the horizon .

I think it's possible that he's trying to goad Parliament into taking control and forcing him to go to Brussels to request an extension. That way, he'll have a new scapegoat and can dodgy the missiles which will inevitable be fired at him.

prawnsambo

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

I think it's possible that he's trying to goad Parliament into taking control and forcing him to go to Brussels to request an extension. That way, he'll have a new scapegoat and can dodgy the missiles which will inevitable be fired at him.

Yep. Get 'forced' into calling an election and regretfully asking for an extension so that he can get his mandate for... ahem... y'know... ehhhh... deliver brexit

ancapailldorcha

prawnsambo wrote: »

Yep. Get 'forced' into calling an election and regretfully asking for an extension so that he can get his mandate for... ahem... y'know... ehhhh... deliver brexit

I think that it'll be the moment that, should it ever arrive, will kill the Brexiter coalition of nationalists, libertarians, populists and Ulster unionists who all seem to want mutually exclusive things.

Sam Russell

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

I think that it'll be the moment that, should it ever arrive, will kill the Brexiter coalition of nationalists, libertarians, populists and Ulster unionists who all seem to want mutually exclusive things.

And hopefully galvanise the remain minded MPs to block the GE until after they revoke Art 50, and make it near impossible to start it again.

prawnsambo

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

I think that it'll be the moment that, should it ever arrive, will kill the Brexiter coalition of nationalists, libertarians, populists and Ulster unionists who all seem to want mutually exclusive things.

If there is an election, I think it will be a very interesting one. The experiment in Brecon and Radnorshire was a success for a remain pact, so if they continue that process between the LibDems/Greens/Plaid/SNP/Change whatever into a GE, it could actually result in another minority government. At that stage, anything could happen.

Nody

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

I think it's possible that he's trying to goad Parliament into taking control and forcing him to go to Brussels to request an extension. That way, he'll have a new scapegoat and can dodgy the missiles which will inevitable be fired at him.

I stated this a week or two as well and I agree; he's defacto campaigning all over the UK as it stands and while it could be taking a card from Trump I think it's more to do with an expectation that an election will come sooner rather than later. Ideally as you and others have noted by the parliament being difficult to shore up the Brexiteer votes that defected / could defect while moving to not need to rely on DUP, change back to NI only backstop (call for a vote that's likely to be won for it as they voted remain in the first place) and get a deal done on that basis (UK is out to do it's own deal and I'm a peace maker letting NI reconcile as it desires etc.). It would align with his behavior to date, hit the requirements for an extension (vote & change of red lines) while appearing a strong Brexiteer while doing it basically.

Quin_Dub

prawnsambo wrote: »

If there is an election, I think it will be a very interesting one. The experiment in Brecon and Radnorshire was a success for a remain pact, so if they continue that process between the LibDems/Greens/Plaid/SNP/Change whatever into a GE, it could actually result in another minority government. At that stage, anything could happen.

I think the Breacon result also showed that the only risk that the Brexit party present is of splitting the Tory vote.

If the election was called in the morning , at best the Brexit party might win a half dozen seats and that's very very optimistic, far more importantly they'll hand a host of current Tory seats to the Lib-Dems or Labour by splitting the leave vote.

johnnyskeleton

brickster69 wrote: »

Ambro. The withdrawal agreement is dead. It has been rejected 3 times by a remain majority parliament. No good saying sign it or else !

Looks like the EU have to come out and say negotiations have failed and are finished in that case.

The EU have been clear. No changes to the Withdrawal Agreement. Happy to negotiate on the declaration of the future relationship.

Michel Barnier wrote:

"But I think it is very clear and it was stated again by Chancellor Merkel today, that the withdrawal agreement is the withdrawal agreement.

"There are other things that can change and be adapted - particularly the future relationship declaration - but the withdrawal agreement is not up for re-negotiation and both Michel Barnier and I were very clear on that today."

https://www.newstalk.com/news/barnier-brexit-no-deal-885037

prawnsambo

Quin_Dub wrote: »

I think the Breacon result also showed that the only risk that the Brexit party present is of splitting the Tory vote.

If the election was called in the morning , at best the Brexit party might win a half dozen seats and that's very very optimistic, far more importantly they'll hand a host of current Tory seats to the Lib-Dems or Labour by splitting the leave vote.

Yeah. However I'm wary of making those kinds of predictions. The UKIP experience was that they never got much above 12% in a GE and just one seat in Westminster. These are different times, but it seems that the Johnson government are doing everything to place themselves square in front of the BP to ensure they don't lose votes to them. They'll lose some clearly, but I would be surprised if the BP get much more than UKIP did at their best. The voting public don't seem to see them as a 'Westminster' party.

Lux23

I had this discussion with a sales man from Yorkshire today.

Would you be interested in taking out an advert in a UK publication?
No, I don't think it's the right market for us at the moment.
Why?
Well, we are focusing on other European markets as things are looking quite complicated given Brexit.
But why would that affect Ireland?
Well, if it turns out there is a no deal or no backstop we don't think UK customers will be coming here as much and so we are focusing what little budget we have on other EU countries.
But you will be leaving the EU as well? You're the same as us.
No, Ireland will remain - unless you mean Northern Ireland?

Complete silence and then he said thanks for your time. I googled his name and it came up as 'Sales Representative for the UK and Ireland' how on earth does someone dealing with Irish customers everyday not know that most of the island is Independent.

Imreoir2

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

I think it's possible that he's trying to goad Parliament into taking control and forcing him to go to Brussels to request an extension. That way, he'll have a new scapegoat and can dodgy the missiles which will inevitable be fired at him.

That is a theory that I have heard quite a lot, but I am not so sure. Johnson, being the unprincipled opportunist that he is, will do whatever is in his own interest. Right now, I can't see the above strategy being in his best interests. Firstly I think it is reasonably clear what he wants, to win a good sized majority for himself as PM. I think he see's the best path to doing that in a No-Deal Brexit.

Right now the counry is devided between Brexiteer and Remainer. With both sides also devided, the Brexiteer side between the Brexit Party and Conservatives and the remain side between Lib-Dems and Labour. The trick for Borris in an election is to unite the Brexiteer side behind him while keeping the remainers devided. If he goes for an election before Brexit, then the Brexiteer side will be devided with alot of the vote going to the Brexit Party. After a no-deal Brexit, however, the Brexit party has no reason to exist. If there was a no-deal at the end of October and an election in mid November then the Conservatives could reasonably expect to pick up the Brexit vote, while there is every reason to expect an angry and frustrated remain camp would be devided in recriminations between the Lib Dem's and Labour.

Borris could get a large majority simply because the other side was too devided to stop him. Then he could do whatever he likes, including for the optimists among us, ditch the DUP and do a quick deal with the EU not unlike the deal on offer now with backstop included. Remember, no-deal is not the end. The UK and the EU will still need a deal, and if a Johnson Government is willing and able to accept the deal after Brexit that May could not get through before Brexit, then I think the EU would find a way to put the genie back in the bottle as far as trade relations go for an interim period while both sides settle in for the long slog of talks to finalise the future arangement.

If he plays his cards right, he could, maybe, be the PM who delivers no-deal Brexit and also saves the UK from no-deal Brexit. But that is very much a glass half full picture of where all this is headed.

declanflynn

Irish Praetorian wrote: »

briany wrote: »

That's would be extremely disappointing for the people who not only want immigration to stop, but also severely reduce the number of immigrants already present.

I would be a little more worried about the effects at a more fundamental level. Think of it - you've spent decades being on the political margins and now are apparently the centre of attention; Brexit is 'the will of the people' and is apparently all things to all people. Somehow, it's going to manage to reconcile the white working class with more traditional views and the migrant communities looking for easier family reunification; to lower house prices whilst ensuring pensioners still have a stable nest egg to retire on; to bring back industries lost to the vagaries of the new global economy whilst at the same time breaking the 'protectionist shackles' of the EU.

But of course it can't - and so whether Brexit goes through or Remain reasserts itself, eventually you're going to have a significant body of disaffected and disappointed people for whom the political system offers no resource. Where they might turn next is what frightens me and whether a new period is coming, new 'Years of Lead' or even just revived struggle in 'frozen conflicts' like Northern Ireland, all of these things should concern us.

Hitler was able to convince Germans when he came to power that the economy was strong and unemployment was low when the opposite was true, any time this was questioned it was blamed on non Germans, parallels in Britain

Imreoir2

Lux23 wrote: »

I had this discussion with a sales man from Yorkshire today.

Would you be interested in taking out an advert in a UK publication?
No, I don't think it's the right market for us at the moment.
Why?
Well, we are focusing on other European markets as things are looking quite complicated given Brexit.
But why would that affect Ireland?
Well, if it turns out there is a no deal or no backstop we don't think UK customers will be coming here as much and so we are focusing what little budget we have on other EU countries.
But you will be leaving the EU as well? You're the same as us.
No, Ireland will remain - unless you mean Northern Ireland?

Complete silence and then he said thanks for your time. I googled his name and it came up as 'Sales Representative for the UK and Ireland' how on earth does someone dealing with Irish customers everyday not know that most of the island is Independent.

I guess most British people don't give it much thought. It would not surprise me if when they hear that Ireland is causing trouble over the backstop, they just file it away as being much the same as Sturgen being uppity about an independance referendum. Just another devolved government causing ructions, but ultimatly what Westminster decides goes.

declanflynn

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

brickster69 wrote: »

Ambro. The withdrawal agreement is dead. It has been rejected 3 times by a remain majority parliament. No good saying sign it or else !

Looks like the EU have to come out and say negotiations have failed and are finished in that case.

Why would the EU say this? They negotiated the deal with the UK and now the UK is rejected the deal because of the backstop they suggested. All the EU can do now is wait while the UK continues to squabble with and tear at itself until the inevitable request for an extension.

The Eu have said negotiations are finished

prawnsambo

Imreoir2 wrote: »

That is a theory that I have heard quite a lot, but I am not so sure. Johnson, being the unprincipled opportunist that he is, will do whatever is in his own interest. Right now, I can't see the above strategy being in his best interests. Firstly I think it is reasonably clear what he wants, to win a good sized majority for himself as PM. I think he see's the best path to doing that in a No-Deal Brexit.

Right now the counry is devided between Brexiteer and Remainer. With both sides also devided, the Brexiteer side between the Brexit Party and Conservatives and the remain side between Lib-Dems and Labour. The trick for Borris in an election is to unite the Brexiteer side behind him while keeping the remainers devided. If he goes for an election before Brexit, then the Brexiteer side will be devided with alot of the vote going to the Brexit Party. After a no-deal Brexit, however, the Brexit party has no reason to exist. If there was a no-deal at the end of October and an election in mid November then the Conservatives could reasonably expect to pick up the Brexit vote, while there is every reason to expect an angry and frustrated remain camp would be devided in recriminations between the Lib Dem's and Labour.

Borris could get a large majority simply because the other side was too devided to stop him. Then he could do whatever he likes, including for the optimists among us, ditch the DUP and do a quick deal with the EU not unlike the deal on offer now with backstop included. Remember, no-deal is not the end. The UK and the EU will still need a deal, and if a Johnson Government is willing and able to accept the deal after Brexit that May could not get through before Brexit, then I think the EU would find a way to put the genie back in the bottle as far as trade relations go for an interim period while both sides settle in for the long slog of talks to finalise the future arangement.

If he plays his cards right, he could, maybe, be the PM who delivers no-deal Brexit and also saves the UK from no-deal Brexit. But that is very much a glass half full picture of where all this is headed.

I don't agree. Firstly because he'd be mad to try and campaign after a hard brexit. The reality would repel all lies. The chaos at ports and shortages in supermarkets would be hard to ignore and even harder to spin. And secondly because the blame would fall squarely on his shoulders. That's something he would sell his (undetermined number of) children to avoid.

And regardless of all that, the EU could not reinstate the WA after a hard brexit. It would breach EU law to in effect, grant membership to a third country in that way. There isn't a mechanism and would never get through the EuCo.

trellheim

Originally Posted by ancapailldorcha
think it's possible that he's trying to goad Parliament into taking control and forcing him to go to Brussels to request an extension. That way, he'll have a new scapegoat and can dodgy the missiles which will inevitable be fired at him.

But - and this is what I'm stuck on at the moment - why ? What's the point if at the end of the extension you still go hard out . Assuming cold hard axioms like 'nothing matters but the tory party'

A) if you extend and call an election you've massively caused problems for yourself as Brexit party can point and shriek

No deal out Oct 31 = Brexit party neutralized , party for all , country fked but the Tories survive AND in government

I'm struggling to see anything beyond B for them here

brickster69

declanflynn wrote: »

The Eu have said negotiations are finished

So they have ended negotiations. Have they are mandate to do that ?

Strazdas

Imreoir2 wrote: »

That is a theory that I have heard quite a lot, but I am not so sure. Johnson, being the unprincipled opportunist that he is, will do whatever is in his own interest. Right now, I can't see the above strategy being in his best interests. Firstly I think it is reasonably clear what he wants, to win a good sized majority for himself as PM. I think he see's the best path to doing that in a No-Deal Brexit.

Right now the counry is devided between Brexiteer and Remainer. With both sides also devided, the Brexiteer side between the Brexit Party and Conservatives and the remain side between Lib-Dems and Labour. The trick for Borris in an election is to unite the Brexiteer side behind him while keeping the remainers devided. If he goes for an election before Brexit, then the Brexiteer side will be devided with alot of the vote going to the Brexit Party. After a no-deal Brexit, however, the Brexit party has no reason to exist. If there was a no-deal at the end of October and an election in mid November then the Conservatives could reasonably expect to pick up the Brexit vote, while there is every reason to expect an angry and frustrated remain camp would be devided in recriminations between the Lib Dem's and Labour.

Borris could get a large majority simply because the other side was too devided to stop him. Then he could do whatever he likes, including for the optimists among us, ditch the DUP and do a quick deal with the EU not unlike the deal on offer now with backstop included. Remember, no-deal is not the end. The UK and the EU will still need a deal, and if a Johnson Government is willing and able to accept the deal after Brexit that May could not get through before Brexit, then I think the EU would find a way to put the genie back in the bottle as far as trade relations go for an interim period while both sides settle in for the long slog of talks to finalise the future arangement.

If he plays his cards right, he could, maybe, be the PM who delivers no-deal Brexit and also saves the UK from no-deal Brexit. But that is very much a glass half full picture of where all this is headed.

For many British people, the status of Ireland is a bit of a blur. There are plenty who think the ROI is a 'UK region', others think NI is part of the Republic etc.

Even when Brexiteers complain about Varadkar, there's probably a good few who think he's like Nicola Sturgeon and a first minister from one of the regions.

Sam Russell

brickster69 wrote: »

So they have ended negotiations. Have they are mandate to do that ?

The EU have ratified the agreement - fully. The UK have not. The EU do not need a mandate anymore - the job is done.

lawred2

brickster69 wrote: »

So they have ended negotiations. Have they are mandate to do that ?

well yeah... from 26 nationally elected parliaments who ALL ratified the agreed deal

brickster69

Sam Russell wrote: »

The EU have ratified the agreement - fully. The UK have not. The EU do not need a mandate anymore - the job is done.

They did well. Good job

Imreoir2

prawnsambo wrote: »

I don't agree. Firstly because he'd be mad to try and campaign after a hard brexit. The reality would repel all lies. The chaos at ports and shortages in supermarkets would be hard to ignore and even harder to spin. And secondly because the blame would fall squarely on his shoulders. That's something he would sell his (undetermined number of) children to avoid.

And regardless of all that, the EU could not reinstate the WA after a hard brexit. It would breach EU law to in effect, grant membership to a third country in that way. There isn't a mechanism and would never get through the EuCo.

I don't think the crash will be as sharp a day one shock as some people expect. Lets take a timeline of No-Deal happening at the end of October, withe an election taking place two weeks later. The election campaign itself would be talking place in the first weeks of no-deal, before the worst effects are felt. For Brexiteers this will probably be a time of joy. They got what they wanted and it will be months before the full consequences of the severe economic impact is felt with job losses etc. Food/medicine shortages wont really have begun to bite becasue of the prep already done to stockpile the essentials. The EU has already said that it will take unilateral steps to soften the blow on the EU side in the first instance. These measures wont last for too long in most cases but in the first few weeks would soften the initial blow.

As for the EU, I am not going to pretend to know the legalities, but I don't think it would be impossible to give a transititon period to the UK, which is legally no longer a member, a month after Brexit happens given that this is exactly what they were planning to do on the eve of Brexit under the WA.

prawnsambo

trellheim wrote: »

But - and this is what I'm stuck on at the moment - why ? What's the point if at the end of the extension you still go hard out . Assuming cold hard axioms like 'nothing matters but the tory party'

A) if you extend and call an election you've massively caused problems for yourself as Brexit party can point and shriek

No deal out Oct 31 = Brexit party neutralized , party for all , country fked but the Tories survive AND in government

I'm struggling to see anything beyond B for them here

A) If you're forced into an extension due to an election brought about by the HoC, you can campaign on the basis that a majority will give you a free hand to sideline the remainers (who having forced the election will also have forced the extension) and promise to deliver brexit when you've got that majority.

I don't think Johnson wants no deal. The WA with a NI only backstop would suit him fine.