Brexit discussion thread IX (Please read OP before posting)

MrMusician18

FrancieBrady wrote: »

The British media with their loaded reportage, 'under pressure'? Maybe they have just been asked for their plans in the event of a No Deal Brexit. Everyone has known from the beginning that a border would be required, I sincerely hope we have detailed plans.

One would expect there are detailed plans but that the government are pinning their hopes on the ensuing chaos of no deal forcing the UK back to the table in short order.

If no deal persists for more than a year then border infrastructure will be erected. It's a hard thing politically to say but it's what's required. Quite frankly, the border will be sacrificed so that jobs in our key exporters are not.

Russman

Watching Newsnight on BBC and it’s mind boggling. There’s a conservative representative of BoJo on and he’s still talking about GATT 24, they need us more than we need them, Teresa May crumbled we need a PM who won’t, we’ll start to see some fragmentation of the EU’s position when they see we’re serious about no deal, we’ll be quids in with the £39BN plus all the tariffs we’ll collect, yadda, yadda, yadda........

It’s actually frightening. There’s no hope at all for that nation.

Mr.Nice Guy

Bernard Jenkin struggling badly on Newsnight under the questioning of Emily Maitlis. More of the 'they need us more than we need them' narrative. Seems GATT 24 is the new unicorn for the coming months.

I'm not sure they actually believe any of the guff they're coming out with though. I think they're laying the groundwork for a blame game down the line. Will be all about how they tried to be reasonable but the EU 27 didn't want to listen. It will likely go down well with a sizeable chunk of their electorate.

LeinsterDub

https://twitter.com/Freight_NI/status/1143239903557431305

Nightmare for NI fishing in the event of no deal.

10000maniacs

Bernard Jenkin on Newsnight now suggesting that it is possible to do a basic interim trade deal and do it before the 31st of October just on goods and even better can be done on a few sheets of paper under GATT Article 24. Do they really want to put tariffs on trade between the UK and EU? he bellows.
Emily Maitlis is again clueless on this and gets muddled and flustered. Andrew Neal would rip Jenkin to shreds on the same issue.

Tell me how

Are James O'Brien, Emma Barnett good journalists, or........ remainers who feel they are in a fight and must do what they can?

I enjoy them both, and their lines of questions are much more direct than most, but, it seems that they are very much anti-brexit also. Is that because of an inherent belief in the EU project or because they realise these questions must be asked because Brexit just does not seem to make sense in how it has played out thus far?

I think Carol Cadwalladr is someone who asked the questions solely because she saw something wasn't right in how the Leave campaign was funded. Ian Dunt also describes himself as a Loyalist and is ripping the Brexit argument to pieces.

Peregrinus

Tell me how wrote: »

Are James O'Brien, Emma Barnett good journalists, or........ remainers who feel they are in a fight and must do what they can?

I enjoy them both, and their lines of questions are much more direct than most, but, it seems that they are very much anti-brexit also. Is that because of an inherent belief in the EU project or because they realise these questions must be asked because Brexit just does not seem to make sense in how it has played out thus far?

I think Carol Cadwalladr is someone who asked the questions solely because she saw something wasn't right in how the Leave campaign was funded. Ian Dunt also describes himself as a Loyalist and is ripping the Brexit argument to pieces.

If you can't tell whether a critical line of questioning addressed to a Brexiter is motivated by:

(a) a partisan preference for Remain; or

(b) common sense and rational analysis

that tells you a great deal about the nature of the Brexit project.

AngryHippie

Tell me how wrote: »

Are James O'Brien, Emma Barnett good journalists, or........ remainers who feel they are in a fight and must do what they can?

The two don't have to be mutually exclusive.
The leave campaign was based on lies and in breach of campaign finance regulations.
The leave arguments still don't stack up with all of the tory candidates trotting out nonsense arguments that fly in the face of expert opinion.

I think that to be a good journalist, the focus must be on the facts. Something the brexiteers are notoriously short of.

Russman

10000maniacs wrote: »

Do they really want to put tariffs on trade between the UK and EU? he bellows.

I know ! All he was short of saying was "do they not know who we are ?"

He still brought up the German car makers, the northern French farmers and the Irish and how badly they'd all be hit in a no-deal. Honestly the tone was pretty much the UK telling the EU that we can do this the hard way or the easy way, its up to you..........
Really disappointing there wasn't a voice of reason, like even say a random EU official or just someone who's familiar with how it works, to contradict all his points.

If its not total delusion its an attempt at the biggest ever bluff. How can you bluff when the other side has seen your hand ? Its off the wall stuff.

54and56

10000maniacs wrote: »

Bernard Jenkin on Newsnight now suggesting that it is possible to do a basic interim trade deal and do it before the 31st of October just on goods and even better can be done on a few sheets of paper under GATT Article 24. Do they really want to put tariffs on trade between the UK and EU? he bellows.
Emily Maitlis is again clueless on this and gets muddled and flustered. Andrew Neal would rip Jenkin to shreds on the same issue.

Jenkin was cooing that a No Deal would allow the UK to drop tariffs to zero which would lower the cost of living for everyone and actually be a boost to the economy. I was disappointed that Matlis didn't point out that whilst that would allow the country to be flooded with cheap low quality products it would also completely wipe out local industries who couldn't compete with low cost imports and other industries who had previously served export markets but would in a No Deal Brexit be faced with WTO tariffs and therefore become uncompetitive overnight.

Actions have consequences but right now it seems those pushing for a hard or No Deal Brexit are only focused on some hypothetical benefits and completely in denial about the very real world consequences which will destroy businesses and livelihoods.

Zubeneschamali

Tell me how wrote: »

I enjoy them both, and their lines of questions are much more direct than most, but, it seems that they are very much anti-brexit also. Is that because of an inherent belief in the EU project or because they realise these questions must be asked because Brexit just does not seem to make sense in how it has played out thus far?

Try to imagine that you are a UK journalist and No Deal Brexit looks likely. I know it seems impossible that such a frankly suicidal, insane policy would ever be actually likely to be carried out, but for a minute, imagine that's the situation.

Imagine it is being championed by a group who lie confidently every single time they open their mouths or write a word on the subject. Literally everything they say is untrue.

As a journalist, one course would be to stick to the facts, report objectively and be labelled as an antiBrexit extremest, traitor, quisling, Remoaner and True Believer in the EU.

Or you could do what many in the UK have done, which is to adopt the position that there are two extremes, so neutrality requires you to adopt a position in the middle and pretend they are equally far from some reality in the centre.

So you pretend that someone who wants to change nothing at all, to continue with things just as they are today is somehow as much of an extremist as someone who literally plans to wreck trade, drive the UK into the worst recession in living memory, actively drive away foreign investment, key workers in all industries, alienate all of the UKs allies, and give comfort to their international enemies.

Balance.

Enzokk

Boris Johnson did a interview with the BBC. Below is the transcript of the interview. Lots of blather as usual. Laura Kuenssberg did okay, but I fell she let him off on a few points where she had him in a difficult spot. As an example on his record in the Foreign Office and the Nazanin Zaghari-Radcliffe affair he shifts the blame off himself totally. I feel she could and should have asked him if he accepts his words they used made it worse.

On the backstop it is more waffle about the UK not going to put up a border in no-deal. I don't know how that works, how can you threaten no-deal but not go through with the threat and put up a border? That seems counter intuitive to me. If you are preparing for no-deal it means borders and if you are serious you should be willing to put up infrastructure because the EU will do that if it is needed.


In full: Boris Johnson interview with BBC's Laura Kuenssberg

BJ: Well, because I think on both sides of the Channel there's an understanding that we have to come out, but clearly Parliament has voted three times against the backstop arrangements that you rightly describe. And at present the UK, and any UK government, with this appalling choice of either being run by the EU whilst being outside the EU, which is plainly unacceptable, or else giving up control of the government in Northern Ireland. There is a way forward which I think, actually, to be fair all the candidates in the Conservative Party leadership contest broadly endorsed, which was to change the backstop, get rid of the backstop, in order to allow us to come out without this withdrawal agreement, and as far as I understand the matter, that is also the position of my remaining opponent.

...

LK: But do you accept that your plan would require agreement from the European Union, political goodwill, and why do you think they would do that when if the UK had just walked away from a deal that has taken them three years to put together?

BJ: Several reasons. First of all, don't forget, that as I say they got the Brexit MEPs they don't particularly want. They want us out, they've got the incentive of the money. They've also got to understand, Laura, is what has changed and what will be so different is that the intellectual capital that had been invested in the whole backstop had really come from the UK side. We were committed to it. We actually helped to invent it. We were the authors of our own incarceration. Take that away. Change the approach of the UK negotiators and you have a very different outcome.

...

LK: And Boris Johnson are you, would you really be willing as prime minister to face the consequences of no deal which could mean crippling tariffs on some businesses? It could mean huge uncertainty over what on earth happens at the Northern Irish border. It could mean huge uncertainty for people's livelihoods and people's real lives. Now in the real world, as prime minister and I know you dispute how bad it would be, but are you willing to face the consequences of what a no deal might mean for the people of this country?

BJ: In the real world, the UK government is never going to impose checks or a hard border of any kind in Northern Ireland. That's just number one. Number two in the real world the UK government is not going to want to impose tariffs on goods coming into the UK.

The three bolded parts are of interest for me. Firstly it is Johnson confirming he will bin the deal as it has the backstop in it. The second part is to get rid of the negotiators as they seems to be getting the blame. He doesn't seem to understand the civil service only works of instructions from the ministers, if they do a bad job it is the ministers who are in charge of them who are to blame.

Third one he confirms that the UK will not impose checks in NI. So it is a threat to the EU to put up a border basically, and the answer to this seems to have been a question to us to inform other countries of our border plans. Also, you have this answer to where we stand on the border.

https://twitter.com/TomMcTague/status/1143409863453814784

FrancieBrady

MrMusician18 wrote: »

One would expect there are detailed plans but that the government are pinning their hopes on the ensuing chaos of no deal forcing the UK back to the table in short order.

If no deal persists for more than a year then border infrastructure will be erected. It's a hard thing politically to say but it's what's required. Quite frankly, the border will be sacrificed so that jobs in our key exporters are not.

I would imagine that there are plans for infrastructure too.

And it shouldn't be 'politically hard to say'. What seems difficult for some Irish political parties is to lay the blame for having to erect such infrastructure fairly and squarely where it belongs for fear of causing offence. :rolleyes:

Hurrache

So Johnson on Sky News basically saying this morning that it's MaxFac or they walk way and go to GATT.

Nody

Hurrache wrote: »

So Johnson on Sky News basically saying this morning that it's MaxFac or they walk way and go to GATT.

And of course GATT does not exist in such a scenario so it's WTO but GATT forms a great excuse to blame the pain on EU (in UK's press at least) since minor things such as reality does not need to bother itself there.

Enzokk

He was on LBC this morning with Nick Ferrari and it is much the same as the BBC interview. Bluster and obfuscations and lies. He still believes the £350m per week lie and takes not responsibility for any of his actions.

This tweet seems to answer one of his statements about the UK avoiding tariffs.

https://twitter.com/NinaDSchick/status/1143441608827965440

https://twitter.com/NinaDSchick/status/1143442522678730757

He is a chancer who will win because the people that believe in Brexit will believe his bluster.

boggerman1

Edwina curry was on newstalk.how's she taken seriously is my guess.full of unicorns and waffle.

Zubeneschamali

George Canning lasted 119 days as PM - Boris will take office on July 24th, he just has to make it to November 20th to get off the bottom of the table.


The last election took 49 days, so Boris probably has to last until 2nd of October... it's very tight, with Brexit Day on the 1st, there is a very real possibility of another shambles in Westminster in the runup to a No Deal in October, an election is triggered, and Boris could end up as the PM with the shortest tenure in the history of Prime Ministers.


With a bit of luck.

Zubeneschamali

FrancieBrady wrote: »

And it shouldn't be 'politically hard to say'. What seems difficult for some Irish political parties is to lay the blame for having to erect such infrastructure fairly and squarely where it belongs for fear of causing offence. :rolleyes:

That isn't it. As soon as Leo shows his hand, the Brexiteers will shout Wahoo and ignore the Border, the GFA, and NI in general. If the EU is erecting a border, then it won't be their problem anymore (in their heads).

FrancieBrady

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

That isn't it. As soon as Leo shows his hand, the Brexiteers will shout Wahoo and ignore the Border, the GFA, and NI in general. If the EU is erecting a border, then it won't be their problem anymore (in their heads).

The Irish government shouldn't be pussyfooting around what brexiteers might say or do though, whether they be from Antrim or Finchley.

Tell the truth and let the cards fall where they may.

Zubeneschamali

FrancieBrady wrote: »

The Irish government shouldn't be pussyfooting around what brexiteers might say or do though, whether they be from Antrim or Finchley.

Tell the truth and let the cards fall where they may.

Why? Why not keep your cards close to your chest, and play out the hand?

Especially when you know the other guy is a really bad bluffer.

FrancieBrady

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

Why?


Why not keep your cards close to your chest, and play out the hand?


Especially when you know the other guy is a really bad bluffer.

What 'cards'? There is going to be a border if you exit without a deal. No prevarication.

You have been told that the need for a border that 'you' created will have consequences.

There are no 'cards' to be played on this.

Hurrache

boggerman1 wrote: »

Edwina curry was on newstalk.how's she taken seriously is my guess.full of unicorns and waffle.

Her saying that the Irish people understand English people's feelings on Brexit better than anyone else because of what they went through trying to get independence was stunning. Healy didn't pull her up on the astoundingly ignorant comparison.

VinLieger

FrancieBrady wrote: »

The Irish government shouldn't be pussyfooting around what brexiteers might say or do though, whether they be from Antrim or Finchley.

Tell the truth and let the cards fall where they may.

Completely disagree its worked tremendously well so far, also you only have to look across at the UK to see how badly simply laying all your cards on the table for everyone to see can go.


If the Irish government pin their colours to a specific mast it will give the brexiteers something conrete to aim at, the lack of something for them to aim at means they will continue flailing around lying and bluffing about complete rubbish like gatt 24 and magical non existing "technology" as a solution to the border.

FreudianSlippers

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

If the EU is erecting a border, then it won't be their problem anymore (in their heads).

Not directly commented towards Zubeneschamali, as I agree with them, but I've made this point on here so many times... how exactly does one side erect a border between two nations? Are the UK seriously pretending we're all so dumb to believe that the EU will erect a border to keep the UK out but the UK are going to be totally fine with flow into NI without question?

If anyone needs the border to comply with WTO rules (specifically checking to ensure MFN rules are implemented between Ireland and Northern Ireland which will be a major issue to police) it is the UK.

Zubeneschamali

FrancieBrady wrote: »

What 'cards'? There is going to be a border if you exit without a deal. No prevarication.

You have been told that the need for a border that 'you' created will have consequences.

There are no 'cards' to be played on this.

Yes, there are. You are watching them play right now, and calling on Leo to show his hand to the other players. He is, quite rightly, saying that the UK have not finished betting.

Maybe the UK will come to realize that the GFA, a deal with the EU and their own desire to become a buccaneering world trader means the NI backstop is best for them, and no border Brexit happens without Leo having to show his hand at all.

Or maybe Boris decides to try No Deal, and Leo makes a big show of sighing and telling people in NI sorry, we have no choice but to start looking at these worst-case contingency plans for...

... and before he's even finished saying he'll show his hand, the UK ports have collapsed, shelves are empty, Boris is deposed and PM Corbyn of the National Emergency Government asks the EU for emergency relief and accepts the backstop.

There is a lot of time before Brexit happens. It could be years. It might never happen. Even if it happens in October, that is not the end of the game, just one round.

Showing your cards at this point in the game is a ridiculous idea.

Enzokk

Here is an interesting article about the influence of Oxford on Brexit and UK politics.

How Oxford university shaped Brexit — and Britain’s next prime minister

You turn the pages of yellowing student newspapers from 30 years ago, and there they are, recognisably the same faces that dominate today’s British news. Boris Johnson running for Union president, Michael Gove winning debating contests, Jeremy Hunt holding together the faction-ridden Oxford University Conservative Association (OUCA).

Six of the seven men who survived the first round of the Tory leadership contest earlier this month studied at Oxford. The final two remaining candidates, Johnson and Hunt, were contemporaries along with Gove in the late 1980s. 

It is interesting that the names you see in politics were around Oxford around this time. Rees-Mogg, Hannan, Hunt, Cameron, Stewart, Johnson, Osborne.

This is not just limited to the Tories,

Most Union politicians weren’t very interested in policy anyway. Anyone wanting to make policy that affected students’ lives got involved in the separate Oxford University Student Union or their college’s junior common room (JCR). That kind of politics mostly attracted aspiring Labourites. Dave Miliband chaired the student union’s accommodation committee, while Yvette Cooper, Eddie Balls and Ed Miliband were JCR presidents.

FrancieBrady

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

Yes, there are. You are watching them play right now, and calling on Leo to show his hand to the other players. He is, quite rightly, saying that the UK have not finished betting.

Maybe the UK will come to realize that the GFA, a deal with the EU and their own desire to become a buccaneering world trader means the NI backstop is best for them, and no border Brexit happens without Leo having to show his hand at all.

Or maybe Boris decides to try No Deal, and Leo makes a big show of sighing and telling people in NI sorry, we have no choice but to start looking at these worst-case contingency plans for...

... and before he's even finished saying he'll show his hand, the UK ports have collapsed, shelves are empty, Boris is deposed and PM Corbyn of the National Emergency Government asks the EU for emergency relief and accepts the backstop.

There is a lot of time before Brexit happens. It could be years. It might never happen. Even if it happens in October, that is not the end of the game, just one round.

Showing your cards at this point in the game is a ridiculous idea.

What 'cards' are there to be played if they crash out? None whatsoever.

To my mind the average Brexiteer does not know clearly enough what will happen, because everyone is pussy footing around the issue.

Spell out what happens and who will be held to account for it. That is called 'applying pressure' in my book and it is exactly what we should be doing in stereo with the rest of the EU.

First Up

Zubeneschamali wrote:

Why? Why not keep your cards close to your chest, and play out the hand?

Especially when you know the other guy is a really bad bluffer.

The EU is a rules based organisation. So are GATT and WTO.

Their cards are all on the table, face up.

Tell me how

FrancieBrady wrote: »

What 'cards' are there to be played if they crash out? None whatsoever.

To my mind the average Brexiteer does not know clearly enough what will happen, because everyone is pussy footing around the issue.

Spell out what happens and who will be held to account for it. That is called 'applying pressure' in my book and it is exactly what we should be doing in stereo with the rest of the EU.

Irish government has handled Brexit and the border implications thus far close to perfectly in my view. Evidenced by the fact that industry both North and South hadn't been complaining about their approach.

Revealing any more or starting to plan publicly for No Deal will allow UK to respond to Irish action instead of proposing their own. That would be a significant bonus to pm contenders and wider UK government.

I disagree that should there be problems, delays in a no deal scenario after Oct 31st that it's the fault of Ireland/EU.