Brexit discussion thread IX (Please read OP before posting)

Headshot

Mr.Nice Guy wrote: »

Don't know if it was mentioned but thought it was interesting that known Brexiter Julia Hartley-Brewer today tweeted this:

https://twitter.com/JuliaHB1/status/1143893495956037632

So now we're firmly into the territory of Brexit > 'the precious Union.'

Also saw Gordon Brown warning that a Johnson premiership could mean the break-up of the UK. Meanwhile the English establishment seems tone-deaf about the wishes of the Scots as seen in this amazing discussion:

https://twitter.com/lumi_1984/status/1143587403770322947

"For goodness sake, Scotland by itself? How's it going to survive?"

"What does it have? Oil, and a monster in a lake?"

I can't see the Scots putting up with British politics 2019-style for much longer.

That is such good propaganda for the SNP. They should take that quote and put it on the side of a bus

reslfj

serfboard wrote: »

....

Cue a Daily Express/Mail/Telegraph/Ranting Tory Rag headline: "Flood of immigrants expected at the border"

...
" From Dublin, it is only a two-hour train or bus journey to Belfast, and with no border posts in place, there will be nothing to stop Eastern European immigrants entering the UK....

I bet they'd put up a Border infrastructure fairly sharpish in response to articles like that ...

The Ireland-NI border and the backstop has nothing to do with travelling people and everything to do with goods passing the border.

Irland and the UK has a Common Travel Area, CTA. Passports and if needed visas are controlled at the entry points in the outer CTA border - be that a UK or an Irish port/airport or at the Eurostar train.

All EU26 citizens with a valid passport can now and post Brexit enter the CTA for 90 days. Until Brexit a national ID card will also allow 90 days entry to the UK.

Why should an EU26 citizen travel via Dublin, when they now can and post Brexit will be able to enter the UK directly by just getting and showing a passport????

Lars

Tell me how

This video is 6minutes long. I doubt anyone will watch to the end.

The remainer, made a hero out of the Brexiteer by being completely incapable of engaging in a discussion.

Reminded me of an obnoxious football 'expert' in the pub beside you when on holiday and just want to watch some game and have a drink who will just never shut the **** up.

https://www.theneweuropean.co.uk/top-stories/terry-christian-jeremy-vine-on-channel-5-1-6127630https://www.theneweuropean.co.uk/top-stories/terry-christian-jeremy-vine-on-channel-5-1-6127630

Strazdas

Mr.Nice Guy wrote: »

Meanwhile the English establishment seems tone-deaf about the wishes of the Scots as seen in this amazing discussion:

https://twitter.com/lumi_1984/status/1143587403770322947

"For goodness sake, Scotland by itself? How's it going to survive?"

"What does it have? Oil, and a monster in a lake?"

I can't see the Scots putting up with British politics 2019-style for much longer.

I actually don't mind Paul Burrell but Scotland is a bigger country than Ireland and Norway and a reasonably well off one too.

Professor Moriarty

Strazdas wrote: »

I actually don't mind Paul Burrell but Scotland is a bigger country than Ireland and Norway and a reasonably well off one too.

I had to look him up. I had assumed he was a politician. He's a Z list celebrity whose opinion is meaningless. I thought Vine was a serious broadcaster but I was obviously wrong.

Strazdas

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

I had to look him up. I had assumed he was a politician. He's a Z list celebrity whose opinion is meaningless. I thought Vine was a serious broadcaster but I was obviously wrong.

Vine's show is not a current affairs programme. It's more of a general discussion show like Loose Women etc, hence Burrell being on it.

An Ciarraioch

Bizarrely, Politico have Leo on their shortlist for Commission President if Weber pulls out - perhaps they haven't realised yet that Coveney and Donohue provide the substance in FG?

https://www.politico.eu/article/9-center-right-candidates-european-commission-president/

A Dub in Glasgo

Mr.Nice Guy wrote: »

Don't know if it was mentioned but thought it was interesting that known Brexiter Julia Hartley-Brewer today tweeted this:



So now we're firmly into the territory of Brexit > 'the precious Union.'

https://twitter.com/NicolaSturgeon/status/1143940317164527616

Also saw Gordon Brown warning that a Johnson premiership could mean the break-up of the UK. Meanwhile the English establishment seems tone-deaf about the wishes of the Scots as seen in this amazing discussion:


"For goodness sake, Scotland by itself? How's it going to survive?"

"What does it have? Oil, and a monster in a lake?"

I can't see the Scots putting up with British politics 2019-style for much longer.

Thread on Twitter
https://twitter.com/Zarkwan/status/1139091681138135045

FrancieBrady

Is Francois cabinet potential in a Boris government?

Nate--IRL--

An Ciarraioch wrote: »

Bizarrely, Politico have Leo on their shortlist for Commission President if Weber pulls out - perhaps they haven't realised yet that Coveney and Donohue provide the substance in FG?

https://www.politico.eu/article/9-center-right-candidates-european-commission-president/

To quote Douglas Adams

The President in particular is very much a figurehead — he wields no real power whatsoever. He is apparently chosen by the government, but the qualities he is required to display are not those of leadership but those of finely judged outrage. For this reason the President is always a controversial choice, always an infuriating but fascinating character. His job is not to wield power but to draw attention away from it.

Nate

Sam Russell

Mr.Nice Guy wrote: »

"For goodness sake, Scotland by itself? How's it going to survive?"

"What does it have? Oil, and a monster in a lake?"

I can't see the Scots putting up with British politics 2019-style for much longer.

I think they house the British Nuclear Deterrent plus quite a bit of their army and RAF - not sure how much navy.

They also voted to remain part of the UK to stay in the EU, and voted to stay in the EU three years ago.

Hmmm - I think he is providing Nicola with a bit of ammo.

FrancieBrady

Sam Russell wrote: »

I think they house the British Nuclear Deterrent plus quite a bit of their army and RAF - not sure how much navy.

There was quite a bit of talk about Faslane - home of Trident - during the independence ref. SNP are anti-nuclear weapons and said they would turn it into a conventional naval base while Westminster pledged to make the base for all nuclear sub activity.

I think they don't really have anywhere else as well equipped geographically for it.

Sam Russell

FrancieBrady wrote: »

There was quite a bit of talk about Faslane - home of Trident - during the independence ref. SNP are anti-nuclear weapons and said they would turn it into a conventional naval base while Westminster pledged to make the base for all nuclear sub activity.

I think they don't really have anywhere else as well equipped geographically for it.

I thought an independent Scotland might keep the independent Nuclear deterrent for them selves to keep England in order and the other side of the border.

A Dub in Glasgo

There are no other facilities (at the moment) in the UK that can handle them and an independent Scotland could earn some decent income in the short term renting out these facilities

Nuclear weapon storage facility (inside the mountain)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RNAD_Coulport

Nuclear submarine base
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HMNB_Clyde#Faslane_Naval_Base

Enzokk

Mr.Nice Guy wrote: »

Don't know if it was mentioned but thought it was interesting that known Brexiter Julia Hartley-Brewer today tweeted this:

https://twitter.com/JuliaHB1/status/1143893495956037632

So now we're firmly into the territory of Brexit > 'the precious Union.'

Also saw Gordon Brown warning that a Johnson premiership could mean the break-up of the UK. Meanwhile the English establishment seems tone-deaf about the wishes of the Scots as seen in this amazing discussion:

https://twitter.com/lumi_1984/status/1143587403770322947

"For goodness sake, Scotland by itself? How's it going to survive?"

"What does it have? Oil, and a monster in a lake?"

I can't see the Scots putting up with British politics 2019-style for much longer.

I really don't know why any Scot would want to stay in the UK. Their politicians have been ignored and thus the voice of Scotland has been silenced. The Scottish Conservatives are useless as they stand against everything that Scotland as a whole seem to represent in the HoC and the people of England obviously look down on them as just a tiny little country not able to hold a candle to the majesty of England.

I found the end of the conversation interesting, where they fall over themselves to defend Johnson and how he wouldn't talk down to Scotland* but in the end Jeremy Vine realized that Johnson never mentions Scotland so he would in fact be dismissive of them as Brown said he would. So let's comment on how wrong Brown is by realizing he is right.

*He has said things about Scotland, he thinks no Scottish MP should ever become PM. He thinks Gordon Brown perpetrated a fraud by becoming PM and not calling a general election and he published a poem in the Spectator when he was editor that called Scottish people vermin.

Water John

So Johnson believes Gove is disqualified from even attempting to become PM.

Headshot

Anyone watching Newsnight

what a great watch. Emily Maitlis is destroying the Brexiter

boggerman1

Headshot wrote: »

Anyone watching Newsnight

what a great watch. Emily Maitlis is destroying the Brexiter

I must be dreaming cause the pro unicorn Johnson supporter is blaming the EU for them seeking an extension,etc,etc.bizzare interview but par for the coarse these days.please UK just crash out and f**k off at Halloween

FrancieBrady

Headshot wrote: »

Anyone watching Newsnight

what a great watch. Emily Maitlis is destroying the Brexiter

Johnson will force them to give concessions on the backstop at the last minute. That's the way the EU roll apparently.

trashcan

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Is Francois cabinet potential in a Boris government?

Hell, in a Boris government the Downing St cat is probably cabinet material.

fly_agaric

From link posted above: https://www.theneweuropean.co.uk/top-stories/mark-francois-on-sky-news-1-6128141

"what would be fundamentally different would be we would have a prime minister who finally stood up for us."

"He wouldn't - for instance - give the EU £39 billion for nothing in return. Any businessmen would tell you that is a ludicrous way to negotiate, but that's how we did."

As far as I understand it the UK owes this money and agreed that amount after much haggling in a long set of negotiations. It isn't a gift it is a debt. Some of it includes obligations to UK citizens that work/worked for the EU. It's crazy but the Brexiteers seem to love this rhetoric.

How do you get your counter-party in a receptive mood for this super dooper "comprehensive trade deal" after saying "ha ha you absolute fool, I'm not paying my debts so go whistle for it"? It's a puzzler...

But then I suppose the "Eurocrats" and "Continental types" are all stupid with the memory of a goldfish unlike the imagined wily Brexiteer PM (Boris) battling for Britain's right to welch on its debts!:rolleyes:

Hermy

Strazdas wrote: »

...Scotland is a bigger country than...Norway and a reasonably well off one too.

Bigger in what way?

Rain Ascending

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Is Francois cabinet potential in a Boris government?

Actually this raises an interesting question that I've been struggling with: who would lead the UK delegation in any exploratory talks with the European Commission after Johnson becomes PM?

Clearly Ollie Robins will be "moved on" and there will be somebody else from the civil services there. But Johnson will need the Brexit secretary to be visibly in control. But who has the mental capability to go toe-to-toe with Barnier on customs and regulations? I can't think of anybody within the ERG with the intellectual heft needed. There are a couple of Brexiteers from the cabinet that have it, most notably Gove and Cox. But both of these have, if reports are to believed, passed on the job already.

Indeed anybody who accepts the job clearly doesn't have the smarts to know that it is a political suicide mission... Shades of the original expression of Catch 22 come to mind.

So they end up with somebody like Stephen Baker. Then the discussions in Brussels will be very, very short: no sneaky pivot back to the existing WA or drawn out talks to get very close to Oct 31 before declaring No Deal. The No-Deal/extension-with-a-GE crunch in the House of Commons will come quite early on.

4068ac1elhodqr

Hunt says he's for cutting the corporate tax rate to 12.5%
hmm, 12.5%... sounds familiar.

And defence upto 2.5, even 4%. He must be planning on re-taking the colonies.

Strazdas

Hermy wrote: »

Bigger in what way?

Population (5.4m people) and it's fairly well off too. A country like that could easily go it alone as an independent state.

Peregrinus

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Is Francois cabinet potential in a Boris government?

Only if you're talking about the bathroom cabinet. Francois is a joke even among Brexiters.

Sam Russell

fly_agaric wrote: »

From link posted above: https://www.theneweuropean.co.uk/top-stories/mark-francois-on-sky-news-1-6128141

"what would be fundamentally different would be we would have a prime minister who finally stood up for us."

"He wouldn't - for instance - give the EU £39 billion for nothing in return. Any businessmen would tell you that is a ludicrous way to negotiate, but that's how we did."

As far as I understand it the UK owes this money and agreed that amount after much haggling in a long set of negotiations. It isn't a gift it is a debt. Some of it includes obligations to UK citizens that work/worked for the EU. It's crazy but the Brexiteers seem to love this rhetoric.

How do you get your counter-party in a receptive mood for this super dooper "comprehensive trade deal" after saying "ha ha you absolute fool, I'm not paying my debts so go whistle for it"? It's a puzzler...

But then I suppose the "Eurocrats" and "Continental types" are all stupid with the memory of a goldfish unlike the imagined wily Brexiteer PM (Boris) battling for Britain's right to welch on its debts!:rolleyes:

The red bit.

The obligations relating to EU pensions is for ALL EU employees pension entitlements since the UK joined the EU, not just UK employees. The UK are liable for their contribution until the last EU employee due any pension (while the UK was a member of the EU) ceases to be paid a pension, which could be many decades. What has been agreed is an actuarial assessment will be made and the UK will pay over, I think, 40 years. It is NOT the pension rights of UK personnel.

The €45 billion is denominated in Euro and is the balance of commitments made by the UK less any assets that they are due. I would think that if the UK unilaterally reneged on its commitments, the EU might take action to recoup the money, or take retaliatory action - in other words a trade war.

This canard has been dragged up many times (particularly by Boris who said the EU could whistle for the money), and the current UK Chancellor has agreed that they cannot walk away without severe consequences because they owe the money - but it is a cheap sound bite - like WTO rules, Art 24, etc.

As Barnier said 'I do not hear any whistling but I can hear the clock ticking'.

Peregrinus

This. It may be in the interests of the UK (or at any rate of certain UK politicians hoping to become leaders of a certain UK political party) to bluster about not paying these sums, but it is certainly not in the interests of the UK not to pay them. People ask what enforcement mechanisms there would be to oblige the UK to pay and the answer is (a) in theory they could be sued in the International Court of Arbitration in the Hague, but (b) what would prevent the UK from repudiating these obligatiosn is not so much the risk of being sued as the enormous reputiational damage that they would inflict on themselves by such a course of action, and the problems it would cause them in future dealings with other sovereigns.

Leroy42

The fact that the extension agreement specifically excludes any reopening of the WA has hardly been brought up.

That is of course before we get to the practicalities of the timing. But are both Johnson and Hunt suggesting that they go back on the agreement?

Which under the terms of the agreement, AFAIK, the extension would end the start of the following month.

And as is still the case, neither of them have stated what they will be willing to give in order to get this change from the EU. To change any deal one side needs to offer something different that is worthwhile to the other side.

The big issue facing any PM is that they are under severe political pressure at home. The EU have had their elections and can now afford to play a waiting game.

As we saw with TM, and every politician, personal survival is the main determinant on many decisions. The new PM will have to face the choice between extension and possible losses to Brexit Party or No Deal and possible losses to Lib Dems.

funkey_monkey

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Is Francois cabinet potential in a Boris government?

Not for a serious role. He usually works on military committees etc and defence related subjects of little importance. I'm not even sure if the army bods can even stand him.