Brexit discussion thread X (Please read OP before posting)

reslfj

fash wrote: »

It wouldn't be"free trade zone" as such- it would be "areas subject to a backstop style regulatory alignment and effectively within the single market and customs union". So there would be a customs barrier between the car factory and the rest of the UK for example.

The NI being allowed into the SM for goods without the other three freedoms is a major concession from the EU's side to the peace, the GFA and the people on the island of Ireland.
It was accepted by the EU27 as the EU could not find any other foolproof way to match the UK red lines and keep the border open.

It helped the EU's accept this SM for goods only status in NI that the all island job market will continue post Brexit for Irish citizens and UK citizens living in NI. This makes FoM a very small problem as only EU26 citizens specifically migrating to live in NI will be affected.

The four freedoms come undivided and the only exceptions, I know of, is the Irish backstop and Liechtenstein.
Liechtenstein (ppl 37.000, 62 sq.mi) doesn't has to allow EU/EEA citizens to stay permanently within the Principality.
And even Liechtenstein's PM said a few years back that this partial 'FoM opt-out' would most likely not be granted by today's EU.

Lars

allthedoyles

Hi Lars , How is it a major concession , if its only for a transitional period while a future agreement is reached ?

Strazdas

J Mysterio wrote: »

https://twitter.com/13sarahmurphy/status/1167710276982124544

We keep being told that revoking A50 would be the end of life as we know it in the UK - an insane argument that says that No Deal would somehow be the lesser of two evils.

This is beyond nuts. No Deal could break up the UK, kill many people (medicine shortages etc), spark riots on the streets, divide the nation for 30 years and much more. The political fall out from revocation would be a picnic compared to that level of total chaos.

reslfj

allthedoyles wrote: »

Hi Lars , How is it a major concession , if its only for a transitional period while a future agreement is reached ?

I didn't think of to transitional periods but accepting FoM for goods only.

The four freedoms are always all or none. Accepting FoM for goods only is a very large concession and as I wrote before because:

• The EU had no other solution respecting all of the UK/TM's red lines, the GFA and a guaranteed open border.
• NI is a low GDP area where few EU26 citizens settles (many more come to Ireland)
• FoM works for Irish and UK citizens post Brexit - GFA, CTA etc
• The Irish Sea is a natural border and already used as GB border for some SPS checks e.g. in Larne.

Lars

PS! The transitional periods - first one, then two periods - requested by the UK and granted by the EU is also a large concession, but is expected to benefit the UK most but also the EU. They are short term and unlikely to create much precedence for the EU in future deals.

allthedoyles

I meet Northern Ireland truck drivers every day and when I mention Brexit , I get two responses :

1. its not going to happen
2. it won't be as bad as they say

I usually start the conversation by saying '' any sign of the border posts been built yet ?

Charles Babbage

reslfj wrote: »

The NI being allowed into the SM for goods without the other three freedoms is a major concession from the EU's side to the peace, the GFA and the people on the island of Ireland.
It was accepted by the EU27 as the EU could not find any other foolproof way to match the UK red lines and keep the border open.

Why were EU citzens not also allowed move to NI in the backstop? Didn't the Foster-McGuiness letter not suggest this? There wouldn't be that many, but it seems like a reasonable measure, especially as almost everyone in NI are Irish citizens and enjoy FOM.

Bit cynical

20silkcut wrote: »

But if they are genuinely going for a no deal it doesn’t matter if they leave tomorrow or the 31st October?
If they are going to burn the bridges why does it matter what date it takes place?
It will be all gone to hell anyway. Who is going to punish them or what sanction could be brought against them for leaving before 31st October.
Could they leave while parliament is in the prorogue period?
Could they just announce that’s it we are gone. No more talks. We no longer recognize the ECJ etc?? And parliament obviously could not do a thing about it.

However they agreed as members of the EU, long before any referendum that, if they wanted to leave, they would follow A50 procedures. So yes, they could leave and I don't think they would be stopped (I can't imagine military action), but they would be in breach of an international treaty if they did.

briany

Bit cynical wrote: »

but they would be in breach of an international treaty if they did.

Shur, what's one more?

Akrasia

prawnsambo wrote: »

It's not a matter of getting up and walking out the door. The UK can repeal all EU legislation tomorrow if it wants, but the EU can't. So there would be no appreciable difference if they repealed all that legislation. Nobody would recognise it.

Edit: Meanwhile in the land of adequate food, people are being asked not to stockpile food. I think that marks the first step through the looking glass.

If they really were trying to prepare for a no deal, they should be telling people to start stockpiling non perishable foods now so that at least there won’t be panic buying in the days before crash out day. If everyone already had a couple of weeks worth of dried cereal, rice, pasta, toilet paper etc already stored in their homes it would take a lot of pressure off the supermarkets in the days before b day

volchitsa

BluePlanet wrote: »

Because that's what the Agreement to Extend Brexit says.
It's the agreement they and the EU Commission signed.

Well it's not, the agreement was for March. They got that one changed at their request, remember?

So now they're tearing up other agreements, such as the amount they agreed to pay the EU over the next decade or whatever it was - and we won't even discuss how they're risking breaking the GFA - but they can't bring forward by a month a date that is itself six months later than the original date they had agreed with the EU before realising it was too tight for them?

Umm. Seems a bit incoherent.

20silkcut

prawnsambo wrote: »

Because "The Treaties cease to apply...". Without the proper legislation, they still apply. So them leaving now would be like a kid with their arms folded, stamping their foot and saying they're running away, while staying exactly where they are.

Nothing will change. Not until the day when the treaties actually cease to apply.

I’d imagine if they left and were diverging from EU rules that would be recognized pretty quickly. They could immediately stop freedom of movement and begin to import goods that break single market rules. The pressure would be on us then to harden the border.

On the flip side I reckon if they don’t leave during the period when parliament is prorogued they never will. The nutters will never get a better opportunity to have their way.

fash

reslfj wrote: »

The NI being allowed into the SM for goods without the other three freedoms is a major concession from the EU's side to the peace, the GFA and the people on the island of Ireland.
It was accepted by the EU27 as the EU could not find any other foolproof way to match the UK red lines and keep the border open.

It helped the EU's accept this SM for goods only status in NI that the all island job market will continue post Brexit for Irish citizens and UK citizens living in NI. This makes FoM a very small problem as only EU26 citizens specifically migrating to live in NI will be affected.

The four freedoms come undivided and the only exceptions, I know of, is the Irish backstop and Liechtenstein.
Liechtenstein (ppl 37.000, 62 sq.mi) doesn't has to allow EU/EEA citizens to stay permanently within the Principality.
And even Liechtenstein's PM said a few years back that this partial 'FoM opt-out' would most likely not be granted by today's EU.

Lars

True enough it was a major concession to NI - however then this major concession was (partly) extended to the whole of the UK. How is reducing the last concession (the whole of the UK) therefore a major concession itself? Isn't it in fact reducing the concession made?

I fully accept that a "NI + tiny defined Islands within the UK subject to parts of the SM/CU" could be very advantageous to the UK. In which case perhaps the UK loses incentive to move out of it.

prawnsambo

Akrasia wrote: »

If they really were trying to prepare for a no deal, they should be telling people to start stockpiling non perishable foods now so that at least there won’t be panic buying in the days before crash out day. If everyone already had a couple of weeks worth of dried cereal, rice, pasta, toilet paper etc already stored in their homes it would take a lot of pressure off the supermarkets in the days before b day

My thinking on this is that people stockpiling makes it very difficult for government to estimate accurately what food is needed in the short term. It also means that importers are probably having to increase shipments to restock and this could have a knock on affect on port traffic all the way up to b-day. A possible third reason could be that people stockpiling are emptying shelves and that could cause a rush of panic buying by others.

Stop moaning ffs

The very hard headed brexiteers will be the ones refusing for the moment the very idea of stockpiling. As a result they’ll be the ones to watch when shortages do begin to happen.
Penny is a long time dropping for some but that might be the moment it finally does.

prawnsambo

20silkcut wrote: »

I’d imagine if they left and were diverging from EU rules that would be recognized pretty quickly. They could immediately stop freedom of movement and begin to import goods that break single market rules. The pressure would be on us then to harden the border.

On the flip side I reckon if they don’t leave during the period when parliament is prorogued they never will. The nutters will never get a better opportunity to have their way.

But until they actually leave, as far as the rest of the world are concerned, they are still in the EU. And even if they started tearing up the rule book on import quotas etc., they would still be on WTO MFN rules and would be imposing tariffs on those imports, whereas EU imports would stiil be tariff free legally speaking. It would be the weirdest thing to do really. A one-sided situation effectively.

prawnsambo

fash wrote: »

True enough it was a major concession to NI - however then this major concession was (partly) extended to the whole of the UK. How is reducing the last concession (the whole of the UK) therefore a major concession itself? Isn't it in fact reducing the concession made?

It is. But that's not how the brexity bunch in the ERG see it. They see it as being 'trapped' in the CU and unable to make all those juicy trade deals with the US etc. "Trapped forever in the backstop" they scream.

Edit: I forgot to mention that Nigel would be quite happy with that scenario as well. And when Nigel is happy, Brexit Party Ltd. is happy too.

Edit again: And along comes a tweet about a ST interview where Johnson seems to be looking at a NI only backstop.

Ben Done

Nick Cohen scathing of Johnson, Cummings and the Brexit fanatics in the Observer..

Boris Johnson’s lies encapsulate Britain’s democratic decay. They are the bluster of a man who holds parliament and political accountability in contempt. They reveal the corruption of a Brexit movement that has no purpose now other than to secure an empty victory, whatever its original intentions and whatever damage it does to the traditions of Britain’s democracy, once thought to be indestructible and now revealed to be as ephemeral as dust in the wind.

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/aug/31/britain-has-become-a-land-of-permanent-crisis-suits-blustering-liars-of-brexit

mr_fegelien

Does anyone know why Boris Johnson and Nigel Farage are seen as comical figures in British politics? Nigel seems to be a serious man but Boris is frequently called the "Donald Trump" of U.K. politics

fash

prawnsambo wrote: »

It is. But that's not how the brexity bunch in the ERG see it. They see it as being 'trapped' in the CU and unable to make all those juicy trade deals with the US etc. "Trapped forever in the backstop" they scream..

True - however the true brexiter types don't care about NI - nor do they care about the UK car industry etc. So -assuming some would accept any deal whatsoever, which is admittedly a big assumption- they get out of the "trapped in backstop" for the parts of GB they care about while giving cover to a NI backstop. Again this is based on assumptions that people are looking to move from current rhetoric towards a solution.

prawnsambo wrote: »

Edit: I forgot to mention that Nigel would be quite happy with that scenario as well. And when Nigel is happy, Brexit Party Ltd. is happy too..

I'd honestly like to see Nigel make an issue out of a backstop limited to NI and (e.g. the Nissan Sunderland factory etc) - when people in NI don't vote for Farage, and the Nissan factory is shouting back at him to bugger off. I'm sure he'd still find other aspects to complain about - but that will always be the case.

EDIT: Also as said the ground work has already been laid in relation to how amazing "free ports" would be - these "Islands of SM/CU" could be spun as such.

EDIT 2: within the UK, you could counter an argument that "NI is treated differently to the UK" with " no that's not true- look at the Nissan Sunderland Free port and X". It would be difficult, absurd and kinda amusing for the Brexit party to run an argument that "it is a national imperative that we take back control of the customs and tariff regime applicable to the Nissan Sunderland factory "free port" "- especially when the Nissan factory was saying that is exactly what they want etc.
It is also something that can be grudgingly conceded by the EU (for optics with the details making things acceptable) and something that is difficult for the EU not to concede - if you are willing to do either NI or NI +GB, why are you not willing to do this- and are you willing to throw NI and the GFA under a bus.

prawnsambo wrote: »

Edit again: And along comes a tweet about a ST interview where Johnson seems to be looking at a NI only backstop.

That's interesting...

Stop moaning ffs

Adonis is going to be debating farage on LBC at ten. Should be an interesting listen.

prawnsambo

Here's an interesting side effect of "The Treaties will cease to apply...". I wonder how many other little nuggets like this are hidden in the treaties.

Tikki Wang Wang

Marr was fairly useless and ineffective against Gove. UK media really hopeless

Shelga

Why has no one questioned the government on why they want to lay out their new plans now, when they have no idea what money there will be available, as they don’t know what kind of Brexit they are facing?

It is quite clear that a lot of money will be diverted to some kind of crisis fund if there is a no-deal Brexit.

Michael Gove on Andrew Marr just now was the slitheriest, most disingenuous performance I have seen from a member of the UK government in quite some time, and that’s really saying something. He tried to turn the prorogation issue back on Marr, saying he wasn’t showing the audience the question that had been asked. Complete nonsense.

It’s Michael Gove’s fault and no one else’s that he didn’t qualify his answer to the question that was put to him in June. He condemned prorogation unequivocally. He didn’t say “I’m willing to support parliament being prorogued for the longest period in modern history as long as it doesn’t go beyond October 31st”.

Why can’t they wait to have the queen’s speech (all of these arcane conventions in the UK are beyond ridiculous) until after they know what kind of Brexit they are dealing with? The most monumental change to the economy since the Second World War, and they are just glossing over it. But the people are happy to be lied to apparently.

Akrasia

prawnsambo wrote: »

My thinking on this is that people stockpiling makes it very difficult for government to estimate accurately what food is needed in the short term. It also means that importers are probably having to increase shipments to restock and this could have a knock on affect on port traffic all the way up to b-day. A possible third reason could be that people stockpiling are emptying shelves and that could cause a rush of panic buying by others.

They had 6 months to prepare. If there is a hurricane coming, the advice is to make sure you have enough water and food to last you at least 3 days in case you get cut off by floods or damaged infrastructure. This is official FEMA advice in the US.

Brexit is a foreseeable disaster and it is much preferable to have people prepare early by buying extra non perishable goods weeks before rather than the inevitable panic buying in the days before as people notice the supermarket shelves are looking sparse.

I personally have already bought loads of extra cereals, rice, pasta and tinned tomatoes because we’re going to have some shortages in Ireland and I’d rather know I have enough to keep my family fed even if there is some panic buying in the days before and after brexit

prawnsambo

A propos of my post above. I believe I may have found the source of this legislation (or at least a document that lists the requirements in one place). Referred to as the 'blue book'. If these are the same regulations as for toys, there are some changes coming for importers, whether they like it or not. Or else British exporters need to start opening offices in the EU pdq.

The blue book

Stop moaning ffs

For the love of god how is he still allowed to go unchallenged on this and previous

https://twitter.com/bbcpolitics/status/1168086579442675712?s=21

declanflynn

Could bj win an election if he puts the border down the Irish sea claiming/because it would transform the economy of NI and up to 60% of its people would be happy with that idea?
it would deliver a better brexit for the uk, would partly neutralise the Brexit party and would put Labour in a confusing position

volchitsa

Akrasia wrote: »

They had 6 months to prepare. If there is a hurricane coming, the advice is to make sure you have enough water and food to last you at least 3 days in case you get cut off by floods or damaged infrastructure. This is official FEMA advice in the US.

Also, the idea that the government needs to look at sales now to know how much is usually needed in a given month is beyond dopy. All governments have statistics offices that can tell them when sales are above or below usual levels for the time of year. That's how they identify economic downturns for example. Stockpiling now may create issues, but making it harder for government to calculate needs is not high on that list.

reslfj

fash wrote: »

True enough it was a major concession to NI - however then this major concession was (partly) extended to the whole of the UK. How is reducing the last concession (the whole of the UK) therefore a major concession itself? Isn't it in fact reducing the concession made?

I fully accept that a "NI + tiny defined Islands within the UK subject to parts of the SM/CU" could be very advantageous to the UK. In which case perhaps the UK loses incentive to move out of it.

The all UK CU is a huge additional concession as such a CU agreement will give the UK waste benefits and normally comes with a large number of strings (conditions) attached - for the smaller UK normally very expensive 'strings'.

Here the CU is given by the EU for free.

Lars

reslfj

Charles Babbage wrote: »

Why were EU citzens not also allowed move to NI in the backstop? .

The point here is which law that allows people to work across the land border.

FoM was/is a UK red line but the GFA and the all island economy is not.

The EU only wanted to solve the land border problem and not in any way force the UK/NI to a continued use the EU's FoM rules. That is except for EU26/EU27 citizens already legally staying and working/studying/retiring or just being rich enough in the UK.

The Backstop is not about EU26 citizens, but about the SM and the people on and from the island of Ireland.

And it is first and foremost about the law, the treaties and the peace.


Lars