Will Britain ever just piss off and get on with Brexit? -mod warning in OP (21/12)

cryptocurrency

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

Of course. How much they can recover and how long it takes is an altogether different matter.

Depends on if the UK can keep its single market together. I seen the DUP are now referring to the integrity of the UK single market as paramount to the GFA

threeball

Most of these guys have already placed their bets against the pound knowing full well it would nose dive. Moggs investments have made him millions over the last two years.

TallyRand

Regarding trade deals. As Ireland we’re doing trade deals with China last year, where those trade deals under the EU umbrella or just bilaterally between the two nations?

I suppose my main question is actually, can the UK do trade deals with countries inside or outside the EU in a bilateral arrangement or do they revert to WTO rules unless already agreed?

Professor Moriarty

cryptocurrency wrote: »

Depends on if the UK can keep its single market together. I seen the DUP are now referring to the integrity of the UK single market as paramount to the GFA

Well, they would, wouldn't they? The UK's "Single Market" won't save them.

Bannasidhe

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

Of course. How much they can recover and how long it takes is an altogether different matter.

And those that do not recover but go under are merely collateral damage.

davedanon

cryptocurrency wrote: »

Depends on if the UK can keep its single market together. I seen the DUP are now referring to the integrity of the UK single market as paramount to the GFA

The hypocritical bastards. They vehemently opposed the GFA, and hated it right up until just now, when they invoke it in their hour of need.

davedanon

Ivan Yates is right about one thing. The DUP had the mother of all deals on the table. NI-only backstop, they get to have one foot in the EU's single market, and the other in the UK's. The best of both worlds. But they're so fecking puritan. They just can't do that Catholic/Jesuit - talk out of both sides of the mouth, both-this-and-that thing. They have to be ONE THING ONLY. They can only point in one direction. Plus, they probably thought that the deal couldn't be that good. They were being swindled somehow. The EU and Dublin were trying to cut the Union guy rope. Serve them right if they get ****ed over.

cryptocurrency

davedanon wrote: »

Ivan Yates is right about one thing. The DUP had the mother of all deals on the table. NI-only backstop, they get to have one foot in the EU's single market, and the other in the UK's. The best of both worlds. But they're so fecking puritan. They just can't do that Catholic/Jesuit - talk out of both sides of the mouth, both-this-and-that thing. They have to be ONE THING ONLY. They can only point in one direction. Plus, they probably thought that the deal couldn't be that good. They were being swindled somehow. The EU and Dublin were trying to cut the Union guy rope. Serve them right if they get ****ed over.

Sounds like Leo

Imreoir2

TallyRand wrote: »

Regarding trade deals. As Ireland we’re doing trade deals with China last year, where those trade deals under the EU umbrella or just bilaterally between the two nations?

I suppose my main question is actually, can the UK do trade deals with countries inside or outside the EU in a bilateral arrangement or do they revert to WTO rules unless already agreed?

I don't think we were doing a trade deal with China, I think we were trying to convince China to reduce/remove restrictions which they applied under WTO rules on health grounds to some agri products after an outbreak of (I think) foot and mouth several years ago. There are exceptions allowed to general trade rules for such a thing, as such its not a trade deal that would remove them but just convincing them that the conditions that justified the imposition of restrictions in the first place are no-longer valid. Anything beyond that would just be a trade mission to showcase Irish companies and products to try to stimulate interest in the Chinese market and promote private business connections. Actual trade deals on a government to government level, things like tarrifs, standards, quotas etc, are the remit of the EU.

Peregrinus

cryptocurrency wrote: »

So everyone acknowledges the UK recovers from No deal

Not at all, no.

Obviously, they'll recover from the initial disruption of no deal; businesses will reconfigure themselves to their new, reduced circumstances; Welsh lamb farming, having been abandoned, cannot be abandoned a second time. Etc, etc. Job losses cannot continue, and business insolvencies cannot continue, month after month after month. The transitional impact of a no-deal Brexit, while shocking, is . . . well, transitional. At some point you have made the transition.

But this does not mean that things then go back to the way they were before. The business models that are broken by no deal brexit remain broken; the activities that were rendered unviable remain unviable. No-deal Brexit, if it persists, erects significant barriers to trade and has a permanently depressing effect on the UK economy. Growth may resume, but it will not resume at the rates made possible by participation in the Single Market. The UK may not be contracting, but it will still, over time, be falling further and further behind what it could achieve, and further and further behind comparator economies within the EU. There are no economic models which suggest that this drag effect can be offset by magical new trade deals with China, North Korea and countries yet to be discovered under the sea (even if such can be concluded by a UK which has proved unable to conclude the easiest deal in history).

In that sense, no, as long as the conditions of a no-deal Brexit persist, there will be no recovery from no-deal Brexit.

SeaBreezes

cryptocurrency wrote: »

So everyone acknowledges the UK recovers from No deal

It's the same as the question put to Mogg that he wouldn't answer. What level of mortality rate is acceptable to you?

They are crashing the car to pick apart the wreckage and sell off any parts they can. Not concerned about the occupants or how many die. The surviving occupants will recover eventually but with health issues and the car will never run as good. And they are doing this voluntarily to avoid paying tax on billions they already own. Quite frankly it's disgusting.

cryptocurrency

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2019/09/10/britons-want-brexit-referendum-respected-poll-reveals-public/

This is what the EU needs to get their head around.

cryptocurrency

cryptocurrency wrote: »

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2019/09/10/britons-want-brexit-referendum-respected-poll-reveals-public/

This is what the EU needs to get their head around.

What does that even mean? Are you saying the EU should change their approach because of what British people think?

Peregrinus

cryptocurrency wrote: »

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2019/09/10/britons-want-brexit-referendum-respected-poll-reveals-public/

This is what the EU needs to get their head around.

The article is paywalled for me, but the bit I can read says that "Fifty four per cent agree the referendum result should be respected".

Seriously? If I were a Brexit supporter I would not be calling attention to this. When we recall that 52% actually voted for Leave, what this survey suggests is that the only people who think the result should be respected are those who like the result for itself; that practically nobody who thought brexit was a bad idea believes that the referendum result provides a reason for implementing brexit .

That's appalling. It's really, really bad news, because it indicates one of two things:

- The long-standing consensus that the UK should be governed democratically, that democratic decision-making processes confer legitimacy and a mandate which should be respected, has disappeared.

... or ...

- British people no longer see the 2016 referendum as a legitimate democratic exercise which should be respected as such. That could be because they see the exercise itself as flawed because of corruption, dishonesty, foreign financing, etc, or because they think any legitimate mandate it may once have conferred has been superseded by the hijacking of the referendum by factions pushing an extremist hard brexit which was not voted for.

Either way, I am astonished that cryptocurrency would draw this to our attention. Neither of these possible explanations can possibly be considered a good thing, from a Brexit supporter's point of view. On the contrary, they indicate the serious trouble that the brexit project is in or the enormous harm it has done or, possibly, both.

cryptocurrency

Deleted User wrote: »

What does that even mean? Are you saying the EU should change their approach because of what British people think?

They have made no concessions. They keep talking about the UK red lines but don't move their own.

The debate in the UK needs to focus more on how the common market in the 70s is the project we have now without previous referendums...in fact every nation needs to have that public debate including the US. We need to question seriously the claims the EU have any democratic principles.

It needs to be put out there that they need to wind their neck in as this EU army talk, fedralisation and all that might end up with Brussels needing regime change.

Peregrinus

cryptocurrency wrote: »

They have made no concessions. They keep talking about the UK red lines but don't move their own.

They made their concessions early on, accepting the UK red lines and modifying their own so as to craft a withdrawal agreement constructed around the UK red lines. The UK simply trousered these concessions, did not respond in kind, and now honks about the UK not having made any concessions.

cryptocurrency

cryptocurrency wrote: »

They have made no concessions. They keep talking about the UK red lines but don't move their own.

Tell us what concession they should make.

Peregrinus

Peregrinus wrote: »

They made their concessions early on, accepting the UK red lines and modifying their own so as to craft a withdrawal agreement constructed around the UK red lines. The UK simply trousered these concessions, did not respond in kind, and now honks about the UK not having made any concessions.

The UK also conceded to agreeing the withdraw agreement before discussion on a trade agreement could commence.

If the EU and UK were doing that, rather than dancing around something that is only temporary, we may be looking at an entirely different scenario right now.

Aegir

Aegir wrote: »

The UK also conceded to agreeing the withdraw agreement before discussion on a trade agreement could commence.

If the EU and UK were doing that, rather than dancing around something that is only temporary, we may be looking at an entirely different scenario right now.

I think it's good that trade negotiations aren't poisoned by the UK using the three issues as leverage during them.

At least when this shltshow is over, discussions can commence on a clean slate.

Peregrinus

Aegir wrote: »

The UK also conceded to agreeing the withdraw agreement before discussion on a trade agreement could commence.

If the EU and UK were doing that, rather than dancing around something that is only temporary, we may be looking at an entirely different scenario right now.

I think if UK attitudes to honouring their no-hard-border guarantee in the Withdrawal Agreement were mirrored in their approach to the FTA, there is no prospect whatsoever that the UK would agree to an FTA whose terms would be anything like sufficient to avoid a hard border, whether or not supplemented by technical arrangements.

So, no, I'm sceptical that we would be an entirely different scenario right now. If the past three years have taught us anything, it's how wise we were to get the border placed front and centre in the Brexit negotiations.

And the UK have not held up their promises from Phase 1 as it stands

First Up

cryptocurrency wrote:

It needs to be put out there that they need to wind their neck in as this EU army talk, fedralisation and all that might end up with Brussels needing regime change.

There won't be an EU army nor will there be a federal Europe.

Now, is anything else bothering you?

FrancieBrady

Peregrinus wrote: »

So, no, I'm sceptical that we would be an entirely different scenario right now. If the past three years have taught us anything, it's how wise we were to get the border placed front and centre in the Brexit negotiations.

That was a major achievement by our negotiators/diplomats/MEP's.
And a testament to how the EU is a much better union for us to be in.
We would be sidelined and watching on at this stage as the UK trampled all over the achievements of the GFA, which this whole process has shown they don't really understand. They do (or least some of them do) understand it now and it's importance to the people of Ireland.

Peregrinus

FrancieBrady wrote: »

That was a major achievement by our negotiators/diplomats/MEP's.
And a testament to how the EU is a much better union for us to be in.
We would be sidelined and watching on at this stage as the UK trampled all over the achievements of the GFA, which this whole process has shown they don't really understand. They do (or least some of them do) understand it now and it's importance to the people of Ireland.

Oh, gosh, yes. There's a striking contrast between how Ireland's voice is heard, and its influence felt, in the Brexit negotiations, as against the consideration given to the wishes and interests of Northern Ireland. You couldn't ask for a more graphic illustration of the difference between independence within the European Union and dependence with the United Kingdom.

Ash.J.Williams

Deleted User wrote: »

Is anybody at all talking about who is going to make the massive financial killings on Brexit?

Is George Soros up to anything? Surely some funds are circling to replicate his 1992 Black Wednesday?

Aside from your average cock-fight attending smuggler in the border counties making a fortune with a hard Brexit, who else is going to profit?

tories?

FrancieBrady

FrancieBrady wrote: »

That was a major achievement by our negotiators/diplomats/MEP's.
And a testament to how the EU is a much better union for us to be in.
We would be sidelined and watching on at this stage as the UK trampled all over the achievements of the GFA, which this whole process has shown they don't really understand. They do (or least some of them do) understand it now and it's importance to the people of Ireland.

this was identified by the British government right from the start. In the white paper that was issued before article 50 was even invoked.

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/the-united-kingdoms-exit-from-and-new-partnership-with-the-european-union-white-paper/the-united-kingdoms-exit-from-and-new-partnership-with-the-european-union--2#protecting-our-strong-and-historic-ties-with-ireland-and-maintaining-the-common-travel-area

FunLover18

"Boris Johnson’s suspension of UK Parliament is unlawful, judges at Scotland’s highest civil court rule"

https://twitter.com/BBCBreaking/status/1171712198688854016?s=19

FrancieBrady

FunLover18 wrote: »

"Boris Johnson’s suspension of UK Parliament is unlawful, judges at Scotland’s highest civil court rule"

https://twitter.com/BBCBreaking/status/1171712198688854016?s=19

The Scottish are revolting.

LostinBlanch

Deleted User wrote: »

Is anybody at all talking about who is going to make the massive financial killings on Brexit?

Is George Soros up to anything? Surely some funds are circling to replicate his 1992 Black Wednesday?

Aside from your average cock-fight attending smuggler in the border counties making a fortune with a hard Brexit, who else is going to profit?

People like Crispin Odey who made £330 Million on shorting the pound ahead of the Brexit Referendum; and James Hanbury. Also Sir Paul Marshall who was instrumental in persuading Gove (and hence Johnson) to change from Remain to Leave.

They are definitely just waiting in the wings for things to go south and then swoop in to get UK assets at rock bottom prices. Hey who cares about huge social disruption, food shortages and increased mortality rates. That's a price they're willing to pay. :rolleyes:

McMurphy

FrancieBrady wrote: »

The Scottish are revolting.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jX1uTui5I2c