Brexit discussion thread X (Please read OP before posting)

Stop moaning ffs

prawnsambo wrote: »

Following on from the discussion about Ruth Davidson and what she said, we now have what looks like spin coming from Dominic Cummings to negate what she said about a deal.

All this seems really fishy. Anonymous accounts leaking things?

https://twitter.com/emmakennedy/status/1166997012761497600?s=21

Stacksofwacks

20silkcut wrote: »

Took a flight to London from Dublin last week. Within 5 minutes or so of been airborne the welsh coast was clearly in view from my seat in the plane. Within another 10-15 minutes we were flying over it.
It just struck me how geographically close we are to Britain. How different the view points are on either side of that sea that can be crossed in minutes by air.
How big the impact will be on us.
In relative terms we are living on top of each other. We are very definitely in the splash zone.

More importantly we are the only EU country with a land border with the UK. People in the brexit camp dont seem to realize or care much about that and just see us being affect the same way as france or the netherlands. Everything from ambulances and fire brigades going through there every day. The jeoprady is huge. Also most of our freight goes through British ports which means we will be affected even worse

Jizique

prawnsambo wrote: »

I don't think you can say that about Davidson's thoughts on Johnson. She said in her PC that she spoke to him at length and that she believes him when he says he wants a deal. And tellingly, she urged parliamentarians to vote for a deal when it comes back to the HoC. Very strenuously urged them, I might add.

It was in a Spectator article i was reading last night, it didn't pull any punches.

LeinsterDub

Stop moaning ffs wrote: »

Whatever it’s worth from this guy. You’d wonder why he’s tweeting it

https://twitter.com/jamiebrysoncpni/status/1167059118907150337?s=21

Their is a school of thought that BoJo is attempting to force the oppositions hand and have the call a VONC and he'll be able to go to the country with basically a "Remove the traitors" campaign .

VinLieger

Jizique wrote: »

It was in a Spectator article i was reading last night, it didn't pull any punches.

Is he that good of a liar or is she just incredibly gullible?

Professor Moriarty

This from Laura Parker of Momentum:

“Eton educated, millionaire Boris Johnson is stealing our democracy so he can sell off our NHS to big US corporations in a no deal, Trump first Brexit. This is an establishment coup by a tiny, privileged elite who have been eroding our democracy for decades. Real power doesn’t sit with the Queen or in parliament. It’s with us, the people - and that’s why we need to take action. There are thousands of us who will join an occupation of Parliament and block the roads before we let Johnson close the doors on democracy. Today we’re going to contact all Momentum supporters and encourage them to protest, occupy and blockade on Saturday.”

The trade unions are also signed up for this. Let the games begin.

robinph

BarryD2 wrote: »

Please explain? How they can they be powers if she can't use them?

If she decides to not follow the instructions of the PM then the next action by parliament will be to remove the monarchy from the process of government entirely.

Jizique

VinLieger wrote: »

Is he that good of a liar or is she just incredibly gullible?

She did debate against him during the referendum in 2016.
Found the article -
https://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2019/08/ruth-davidsons-true-enemies-have-always-been-her-own-party/

"That Davidson and Boris Johnson have a terrible relationship is neither a secret nor quite the point. It doesn’t help, but the fact Davidson considers the prime minister a **** is not, on its own, enough to force her out. But again, it hardly helps. And, to be clear, she doesn’t think the prime minister a ****, she considers him a ****. "

ArmaniJeanss

BarryD2 wrote: »

Please explain? How they can they be powers if she can't use them?

Think of it as one of those insects with one fatal sting, but which starts to die itself when it uses it. That's her power.

First Up

Stacksofwacks wrote:

Also most of our freight goes through British ports which means we will be affected even worse

38% and falling. And it will fall even faster if there is chaos at UK ports.

Popeleo

BorneTobyWilde wrote: »

SHe's most likely totally misinformed. Why on earth does she this she would be kicked out when all around are saying people who are in UK are safe, and will be not asked to leave under any circumstances .

She won't be rounded up and sent home on November 1st but if I was an EU national living in the UK today, I would have grave concerns. The Irish will be better protected with the CTA - if that lasts.

The EU had 3 key demands in negotiating the WA - the backstop, the divorce bill and EU citizens' rights. The first two are not acceptable to most of this government despite the same government agreeing to all three in the WA.

What is stopping them negotiating a 'post-no deal' deal while threatening the fate of the millions of EU citizens? They will have very few other cards to play in that scenario if 'Project Fear' was correct all along. And the Home Office minister is the delightful Priti Patel whose musings about starving the Irish into agreement over Brexit say a lot about her character (or lack thereof).

LeinsterDub

First Up wrote: »

38% and falling. And it will fall even faster if there is chaos at UK ports.

Do you know if that 38% includes NI operators using Irish ports to access Britain?

Bit cynical

Peregrinus wrote: »

The point about a referendum is, supposedly, to take the decision away from parliament and give it to the people. The people can't be precluded from approved the deal because Parliament has rejected it.

I think the order of events would have had to have been:

1. Government signs the deal with the EU.
2. Legislation passed to enable People's Vote on the deal.
3. People vote on the deal in referendum.
4. Parliament approves or rejects deal based on referendum result.

What happened was that the parliament skipped ahead to step 4 and rejected the deal.

I suppose it is still possible for a referendum to be held so that the people might approve the deal. However parliament would not vote for it as the deal has already been rejected by them. What purpose would it serve for them? If they want to give the public a chance to vote on the deal, why did they reject it?

Also polls indicate that the WA itself is not particularly popular in the UK so the public would probably also reject it.

robinph

Popeleo wrote: »

She won't be rounded up and sent home on November 1st but if I was an EU national living in the UK today, I would have grave concerns. The Irish will be better protected with the CTA - if that lasts.

I have the CTA as my lifeboat out of here, just have to make sure I'm ready to jump ship before you guys sail off.

El Weirdo

BorneTobyWilde wrote: »

SHe's most likely totally misinformed. Why on earth does she this she would be kicked out when all around are saying people who are in UK are safe, and will be not asked to leave under any circumstances .

Well, when you have the Home Secretary threatening to end free movement at midnight on October 31st, then I'd say people like the woman in the video have every right to be concerned. Not to mention the whole Windrush ****show.

ct5amr2ig1nfhp

I am agreeing with you, we were a dirt poor country up until the 80's into the 90's. 4-5% is about as low as it will go and would probably be deemed as "full employment". Facts are important though "That was basically unconscionable 20+ years ago". 20 years ago, unemployment was about the same level.

Tangatagamadda Chaddabinga Bonga Bungo wrote: »

The point still stands. 30,40,50,60,70 years ago we had higher unemployment. And it's 4.6% now. I don't think it can be lowered by much more realistically.

It went bad a decade ago. That's why it's so solid there has been such recovery of the economy.

Bit cynical

Popeleo wrote: »

What is stopping them negotiating a 'post-no deal' deal while threatening the fate of the millions of EU citizens? They will have very few other cards to play in that scenario if 'Project Fear' was correct all along. And the Home Office minister is the delightful Priti Patel whose musings about starving the Irish into agreement over Brexit say a lot about her character (or lack thereof).

I don't think there's any problem with the EU in a no deal scenario requesting a deal on citizens rights. As you point out it would be very easy to obtain.

reslfj

Shelga wrote: »

Thanks for that clip! I think I understand that the issue is the open skies agreement, not the ownership of the airline, but I still have no idea what stage the British government is at today, in terms of negotiating an alternative.

Look up "Freedoms of the sky" on Wikipedia.

Open Sky in EU/EEA allows all 9 freedoms and other non EU/EEA countries have agreed to join or partly join (incl Tyrkey). The problem is not that the UK can't participate, but that participation will require a deal/agreement that cannot be negotiated before the WA text is ratified.

The rules and agreements are a little bit complicated. The key is here as everywhere - nothing happens without agreements, treaties - 'deals' .

Ryanair is very much dependent on freedom 5-9 but the EU27's unilateral mitigating proposal is just freedom 3-4.
(freedom 1-2 is part of the Chicago Convention).

The freedom 3-4 is currently extended 9 months from March 29 2019 i.e. until ultimo December 2019, but it may be unilaterally extended into 2020 by the EU27.

It is very much about ownership of the planes too. EU/EEA majority ownership is required - a minor problem - but UK majority ownership is required for UK planes.
As BA and Iberia has a common owner there were talks months back about how to solve this problem.

Lars

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedoms_of_the_air

reslfj

Bit cynical wrote: »

I don't think there's any problem with the EU in a no deal scenario requesting a deal on citizens rights. As you point out it would be very easy to obtain.

The EU27 will negotiating nothing new until the WA text - without the transition periods - has been ratified by the UK - nothing, no mini deals,nothing.

The main points in the WA text are

1. EU27+UK citizens rights when living outside own country
   
2. The payment of £39bn or whatever it is on Brexit day (now ~£33bn iirc)
   
3. The backstop as in the WA or possibly an Irish Sea backstop
   
4. A few smaller items e.g. Geographical Indications - GI

The EU27 will just wait until the UK is ready to ratify.

Lars

Zubeneschamali

robinph wrote: »

If she decides to not follow the instructions of the PM then the next action by parliament will be to remove the monarchy from the process of government entirely.

If Parliament had to choose between Liz and Boris, she'd win by 10:1

El Weirdo

reslfj wrote: »

The EU27 will negotiating nothing new until the WA text - without the transition periods - has been ratified by the UK - nothing, no mini deals,nothing.

The main points in the WA text are

1. EU27+UK citizens rights when living outside own country
   
2. The payment of £39bn or whatever it is on Brexit day (now ~£33bn iirc)
   
3. The backstop as in the WA or possibly an Irish Sea backstop
   
4. A few smaller items e.g. Geographical Indications - GI

The EU27 will just wait until the UK is ready to ratify.

Lars

I suppose you could say that the day after they (the UK) crash out with no deal, we (the EU) will hold all the cards.

Flex

reslfj wrote: »

The EU27 will negotiating nothing new until the WA text - without the transition periods - has been ratified by the UK - nothing, no mini deals,nothing.

The main points in the WA text are

1. EU27+UK citizens rights when living outside own country
   
2. The payment of £39bn or whatever it is on Brexit day (now ~£33bn iirc)
   
3. The backstop as in the WA or possibly an Irish Sea backstop
   
4. A few smaller items e.g. Geographical Indications - GI

The EU27 will just wait until the UK is ready to ratify.

Lars

I believe that will be the policy of our side (the EU). Frustratingly when watching and reading the UK media, the call is constantly for the EU to compromise; I honestly cant remember a single time in the last number of weeks and months that Ive heard a UK journalist or interviewer interject and point out that while the EU has red lines here (citizens rights, the backstop and the divorce bill), the UK also has red lines that they have made absolutely no compromise or even indicated willingness to compromise on.

At the moment the general theme seems to be "we're finally putting the EUs feet to the fire and now we're seeing them move", "now the EU is sitting up and saying 'hey, this guy means business'","Merkel is under pressure and thats why she reopened the WA with the 30 day timetable" (ignore the fact she stated in Reuters that her words were being misinterpreted in a grossly dishonest and idiotic way).. basically that now the EU is on the backfoot and that proroguing is a critical part of this gambit. I suspect this is more of the propaganda and brainwashing thats being fed to the UK populace by their media and government. Is there any credible media saying that the EU is in shock and contemplating a climb down out of interest?

Regards the recent incredible events in the UK, I cant tell if this is a bluff by Johnson, that they actually want no deal, or that this is prep for a snap election, but I really hope that the EU holds absolutely firm and grants no extension

BluePlanet

I really see no point in the EU moving at all.
BoJo has already said they won't pay the divorce bill.
So if it were all about the money, as many Tories already state, and we know they aren't paying it, what would be the point in any climb down by the EU?

Throw a EU member under the bus AND get no divorce payment?
Bonkers.

Zubeneschamali

Flex wrote: »

I really hope that the EU holds absolutely firm and grants no extension

No Deal will cost us in the EU a lot of money. If Boris is bluffing, or the HoC takes back control, and the result is a request for an A50 extension, the EU should offer a 2 year fixed extension, take it or leave it.

2 years more without disruption for the EU, 2 years more to squeeze business and investment out of the UK, 2 years more for Remain to overturn the referendum.

What's the downside? Uncertainty, people will cry, but uncertainty about whether No Deal will cost us money in 2 years is better then the certainty that it will cost us that money starting at Halloween.

jimmycrackcorm

Flex wrote: »

Regards the recent incredible events in the UK, I cant tell if this is a bluff by Johnson, that they actually want no deal, or that this is prep for a snap election, but I really hope that the EU holds absolutely firm and grants no extension

It's a clever move by BJ. He knows that he had no answer to the 30 days border solution.
There won't be an automatic extension so it gives just two weeks for something to happen, i.e accept no deal, accept WA or push for GE that will lead to an extension to slow him to get rid of the BP and the DUP

LuckyLloyd

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

No Deal will cost us in the EU a lot of money. If Boris is bluffing, or the HoC takes back control, and the result is a request for an A50 extension, the EU should offer a 2 year fixed extension, take it or leave it.

2 years more without disruption for the EU, 2 years more to squeeze business and investment out of the UK, 2 years more for Remain to overturn the referendum.

What's the downside? Uncertainty, people will cry, but uncertainty about whether No Deal will cost us money in 2 years is better then the certainty that it will cost us that money starting at Halloween.

Don’t agree - while I see where you’re coming from, if a 6 month extension produces this sort of extremist turn to UK politics god knows what a further 24 month fantasy period would do.

20silkcut

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

Don’t agree - while I see where you’re coming from, if a 6 month extension produces this sort of extremist turn to UK politics god knows what a further 24 month fantasy period would do.

I think the EU should express a willingness to extend just for the optics and demonstrate to the International community that a no deal Brexit is not their desire and entirely the responsibility of the UK.

Zubeneschamali

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

Don’t agree - while I see where you’re coming from, if a 6 month extension produces this sort of extremist turn to UK politics god knows what a further 24 month fantasy period would do.

Not our problem until they actually do something, and the worst that can happen is No Deal, which happens anyhow on Oct 31 if the EU does not extend.

No deal now vs. Possible No Deal in 2 years is the same as:

Take a paycut right now or take a chance on a paycut in 2 years.

No brainer.

lawred2

20silkcut wrote: »

I think the EU should express a willingness to extend just for the optics and demonstrate to the International community that a no deal Brexit is not their desire and entirely the responsibility of the UK.

I think that has and continues to be demonstrated.

trellheim

if a 6 month extension produces this sort of extremist turn to UK politics god knows what a further 24 month fantasy period would do.

Arrggh they were asked not to waste it , and they have done precisely that- wasted it! , another extension without a massive change in political climate wont work - which there isn't.

a GE before brexit will produce the same hung govt and a GE with no deal will just be tories 2 , a GE with no brexit will burn the fires even hotter