Brexit discussion thread X (Please read OP before posting)

Zubeneschamali

correct horse battery staple wrote: »

Where are they planning on checking incoming trucks for tarrifs and migrants?

Short term, it seems they are not going to check any trucks incoming, just wave them through to try to keep food on the shelves.

Long term doesn't matter, since No Deal can't last long.

WomanSkirtFan8

Spanish Eyes wrote: »

That fella Rory Stewart is something else. He had an interview with James O'Brien on the Full Disclosure podcast and I confess I hung on to his every word.

He will go far. But it may take a while.

Indeed. I saw Rory Stewart being interviewed a while back and he impressed me too. He's certainly a leader for the future in some capacity.

Stop moaning ffs

Calina wrote: »

She is strongly implying her contact is Irish.

It’s not really news. You can’t depend on her for anything like reliable reporting it’s all gossip and rumors.

Coveney and Macentee have both said exactly what she’s just said. Several times. We’ve no idea what the British are at, dealing with them is frustrating.

They’ve said this a few times.

ToBeFrank123

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

No, the WA is an outrageous leap towards Hard Brexit compared to what the Leave campaign promised the UK electorate, featuring exit not only from the EU, but also the SM and CU. Further from the EU than Turkey or the Ukraine, for feck's sake.

Norway+++ would have been near the middle of No Brexit (48%) vs. Some Sort Of Brexit (52%).

Firstly I don't think you understand what a Hard Brexit is and how it applies to Ireland.

Secondly I don't think you have accepted the UK voted to leave the EU, fully and entirely.

When you are ready to accept this second part I'm willing to discuss this with you ie when you are ready to accept facts and not deal with fantasys, what ifs and if onlys.

BarryD2

VinLieger wrote: »

You literally are just making stuff up at this stage to suit your bizarre narrative that nobody understands how bad this could be, when in reality everyone understands how bad it could be however we have also been preparing for 3 years AND have 26 EU members to help support us through it whereas the UK will have nobody.

Do you know what - you're quite right. I have no idea how this will pan out but the truth is, neither do you or anyone else here. Uncertainty reigns.

But the rhetoric here is reminiscent of what pertained in 2008. Then anyone who dared to suggest that trouble was coming down the tracks, was laughed off the pitch. There was and is a sort of group think that all be grand.

Three years preparation? As far as the public is concerned that amounts to ads now and then telling businesses to get EORI numbers and that if you have a UK driving licence, you may reapply. That's about it, our political leaders here have been largely schtum when awkward questions have been put to them. Even this morning, I've heard the FF spokesperson calling for more transparency.

Leroy42

Even the UK haven't accepted it so strange you seem to think it's a given.

Apart from a minority in both the HoC and the public, the UK clearly does not want to entirely leave the EU.

Christy42

ToBeFrank123 wrote: »

Firstly I don't think you understand what a Hard Brexit is and how it applies to Ireland.

Secondly I don't think you have accepted the UK voted to leave the EU, fully and entirely.

When you are ready to accept this second part I'm willing to discuss this with you ie when you are ready to accept facts and not deal with fantasys, what ifs and if onlys.

Did it? It said leave the EU. Nothing about not having a close relationship with the EU. The issue again comes down to the badly phrased referendum buy until they have a well phrased one we have no idea what kind of Brexit they wanted. Any claims to the contrary are based on nothing.

I mean Norway is not in the EU. They are just on friendly terms. We have had the CTA for years and are not part of the the UK. Norway+++ would be leaving the EU entirely.

Boris himself said no government would be stupid enough to remove itself from the single market. Rees Mogg was in favour of a second referendum to figure out what type of Brexit would happen so obviously a closer relationship would be a possibility.

Zubeneschamali

Leroy42 wrote: »

Apart from a minority in both the HoC and the public, the UK clearly does not want to entirely leave the EU.

Indeed, Johnson is pulling unprecedented shenanigans in Westminster just to keep the possibility of No Deal from being ruled out entirely by Parliament. Doesn't sound like a done deal to me.

lawred2

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

Really, who cares at this point? She has got exactly nothing right, ever, since Brexit started. It is all just impressions she gets from UK sources who are either spinning or just crazy.

Always 'unnamed' sources 'close' to Brussels :rolleyes:

CelticRambler

correct horse battery staple wrote: »

Where are they planning on checking incoming trucks for tarrifs and migrants?

In France. They have been building inspection facilities within (some of the) British-administered zones since the start of the year.

It will not go down well with either the hauliers or the locals, though, if there are queues of trucks on the French motorways waiting to get into those inspection points, but the migrants will be delighted.

Not checking imports goes against the spirit of taking back control and has implications for trading on WTO terms, so it's another nettle that'll have to be grasped regardless of Tory-BP rhetoric.

Zubeneschamali

JRM on LBC (link to clip in tweet below)

HOST: Do you still think the referendum is relevant considering all the new information we've got now, or whether a public vote wouldn't just clear up the air, all the information is out, we can make an informed decision now.

JRM: I think that the problem with that is that that would overturn the result we've already had.

https://twitter.com/OFOCBrexit/status/1168452333526798338

ToBeFrank123

Leroy42 wrote: »

Even the UK haven't accepted it so strange you seem to think it's a given.

Apart from a minority in both the HoC and the public, the UK clearly does not want to entirely leave the EU.

Staying in a Customs Union including more than likely free movement of people was always going to be a tough sell by any PM who would struggle to get it through the HoC.

Abiding by rules you have no say or input into was going to be difficult to accept. Its not really leaving the EU. Its like staying in the EU but not having any power in the EU, a worse fate than actually staying in the EU for those who wanted to take back power. It would render the HoC a rubber stamping parliament for EU rules and I can't see the majority accepting that in the HoC. Like I said a tough sell.

Flex

Calina wrote: »

She is strongly implying her contact is Irish.

I think she has been wrong about everything she has reported on Brexit. Her narrative has constantly been against what EU leaders and negotiators have been publically saying and she constantly makes out the EU is terrified of the UK and disarray. She's doing it again; suggesting (stating actually)

1. mini deals are up for discussion,
2. that if the UK can guarantee that a deal can pass the British parliament theyll concede and
3. that the EU is prepared to make "painful" concessions on the backstop.
4. And of course, that the EU are in disarray and the UK has them on the ropes.

All of this after Michel Barnier's piece in the Telegraph only yesterday too. She appears to take opinions or potential ' what if' musings but runs with them and reports them as fact. Total disservice to the people of the UK who need some solid information from their media

Stop moaning ffs

I think that horse has already bolted with regards losing Conservative votes but the fracture in the party will be the real story this week I’d say. How many will rebel and ignore the dictate from Cummings?

https://twitter.com/bbc5live/status/1168445755972960257?s=21

CelticRambler

BarryD2 wrote: »

But the rhetoric here is reminiscent of what pertained in 2008. Then anyone who dared to suggest that trouble was coming down the tracks, was laughed off the pitch. There was and is a sort of group think that all be grand.

Really struggling to understand what world you're living in, or what news your listening to, or what forums you're reading - but for the last four years, contributors to this forum have been saying that things will not be grand.

In fact, the only people who consistently say everything will be grand are Brexiters.

The rest of us have accepted that things will not be grand, and those of us likely to be significantly impacted (except you) have taken steps to lessen that impact. If any lesson has been learnt from 2008, it's "don't wait for the government to sort out foreseeable problems".

trellheim

Normally at this stage whatsapps off the Whips have leaked. I suppose since there's been no commons business till tomorrow ...

J Mysterio

funkey_monkey wrote: »

Katya's take on things:

https://twitter.com/BBCkatyaadler/status/1168449899316371457

She is best ignored, an absolute gimp. She has no understanding of EU and regularly misunderstands their/ our take.

She was today proposing that it might work for Ireland to accept checks on continent. Absolutely bloody hopeless is she.

Stop moaning ffs

Tony is back with a welcome antidote to katyas whispers and gossip.

Full thread worth a read

https://twitter.com/tconnellyrte/status/1168472691302703105?s=21

woohoo!!!

Looking back, the last chance for the UK were the May Corbyn talks. But the principle of FPTP and winner takes all is too deeply ingrained. The behind the scene documentaries on Barnier and Verhofstadt made clear that they couldn't understand why U.K. politics could not come to an agreement over such an important issue, and were less than impressed with remainers essentially blocking a deal. Of course their chief ire was reserved for Brexiteers like Davis.

Johnson for all his bluster is in a very weak position and all this lashing out is akin to death throes. I don't see the UK being capable of sorting out their mess anytime soon. In such a scenario it's hard to see any sort of deal sticking post Brexit.

ToBeFrank123

Leroy42 wrote: »

Apart from a minority in both the HoC and the public, the UK clearly does not want to entirely leave the EU.

There's a big difference between opinion polls and a final definitive vote such as a referendum when everything is on the line.

The vote in the referendum was to leave.

As for the HoC, there was a vote to open negotiations on a Customs Union arrangement. It was defeated by close to 30 votes, a reasonable majority.

Many in the UK view a CU as even worse than being in the EU.

CelticRambler

ToBeFrank123 wrote: »

There's a big difference between opinion polls and a final definitive vote such as a referendum when everything is on the line.

The vote in the referendum was to leave.

As you say, there's a big difference. Unlike referndums in Ireland or (e.g.) Switzerland, the UK referendum was only "advisory" and non-binding - essentially a glorified opinion poll.

I'm sure there are at least 17.4 million UK voters who would welcome the chance to have a final definitive vote, rather than leave such a momentous decision to a bunch of 600 squabbling MPs.

Enzokk

Others have already commented on Katya Adler's take this morning, but surely this is a contradiction to her own thread?

'EU leader keen-ness to find a #Brexit compromise should not be confused as willingness to do whatever it takes to get a deal with UK. EU single market concerns are paramount when looking at alternatives to backstop. Merkel certainly not looking for deal "at any price" /5'

'BUT bottom line is that EU will only make compromises on backstop - if painful ones for EU - if bloc is convinced that a majority in parliament is guaranteed to approve the revised deal. Right now EU leaders see Johnson doesnt have the numbers /12'

So which one is it? Will there be a compromise but only one that will make it through the UK parliament or one that protects the single market?

I guess the answer is more complicated, and the only compromise the EU will make is when they are sure it will actually pass through parliament, but then this compromise will only be made if it still protects the single market and the backstop. That should lead you to the realization then that there isn't a lot of scope for change from the EU side.


'Officially EU position is 1) it awaits UK proposals because 2) the backstop as stands is the only credible solution that fits the UK red lines as set out by Theresa May and recognises unique situation on island of Ireland BUT privately some key EU players thinking... /7'

'"Did we miss something?" "Were we too focussed on encouraging UK to a closer position with us post #Brexit ?" "Is there a workable alternative to backstop that protects all-Ireland economy and EU single market enough?" /8'

When the UK's own reports are that the alternative arrangements has issues, then the EU didn't miss anything. This is back to raising doubts from the EU side, where they will move at the last moment or they are not all united behind the position.

ToBeFrank123

woohoo!!! wrote: »

Looking back, the last chance for the UK were the May Corbyn talks. But the principle of FPTP and winner takes all is too deeply ingrained. The behind the scene documentaries on Barnier and Verhofstadt made clear that they couldn't understand why U.K. politics could not come to an agreement over such an important issue, and were less than impressed with remainers essentially blocking a deal. Of course their chief ire was reserved for Brexiteers like Davis.

Johnson for all his bluster is in a very weak position and all this lashing out is akin to death throes. I don't see the UK being capable of sorting out their mess anytime soon. In such a scenario it's hard to see any sort of deal sticking post Brexit.

A backstop with a definitive end would probably have been enough of a fudge to get the WA passed the HoC. They could then move to discussing the type of trade arrangement between the UK and EU. Another fudge would probably have been required to get that through.

People always underestimate the importance of a fudge when it comes to difficult negotiations. It allows all sides to save face and kick some issues down the road for discussion at another time.

CelticRambler

ToBeFrank123 wrote: »

A backstop with a definitive end would probably have been enough of a fudge to get the WA passed the HoC.

There is a definitive end: when there are alternative arrangements in place. All the UK needs to do is sign the WA, present the (concrete, workable) plans when they're ready, and the backstop goes away, forever.

Problem solved.

Enzokk

I thought Labour wanted to stop no-deal first before an election?

https://twitter.com/KateEMcCann/status/1168475922095378432?s=20

I know if they win they could ask for an extension and get their own "jobs first Brexit", or whatever crap they think they can get, but that is predicated on them winning first. Legislating against no-deal is a sure bet. Foolish Corbyn once again.

reslfj

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

... as the TIR lorries can just join the empty queue since no checks are needed at Dover or Calais.

1. Do you know how many TIR permissions Ireland can have?

2. Irish TIR marked and sealed lorries should only need an inspection of an intact seal.

3. Do you know how many ECMT permits Ireland can have?

Lars

ToBeFrank123

CelticRambler wrote: »

As you say, there's a big difference. Unlike referndums in Ireland or (e.g.) Switzerland, the UK referendum was only "advisory" and non-binding - essentially a glorified opinion poll.

I'm sure there are at least 17.4 million UK voters who would welcome the chance to have a final definitive vote, rather than leave such a momentous decision to a bunch of 600 squabbling MPs.

Still of far greater significance than an opinion poll. People understood they were giving a mandate to politicians to remain or leave the EU.

They weren't just voting for the craic. They expressed their opinion in a referendum.

You can say anything in an ordinary opinion poll. I've said yes to every question the one or two times I've been polled (not politics related) just to get off the phone.

20silkcut

ToBeFrank123 wrote: »

A backstop with a definitive end would probably have been enough of a fudge to get the WA passed the HoC. They could then move to discussing the type of trade arrangement between the UK and EU. Another fudge would probably have been required to get that through.

People always underestimate the importance of a fudge when it comes to difficult negotiations. It allows all sides to save face and kick some issues down the road for discussion at another time.

At this stage an Extension is really the only viable fudge.
When Brexiteers talk of the EU blinking at the last minute that is the only issue I see them blinking on.
It firmly puts the ball back in the UK court either agree to it or commit economic suicide.

Water John

Not so sure, maybe the only true way to stop a Hard/Crash out Brexit is to have the Brexiteers lose control of Parliament. A soft Brexit would probably be the best outcome for the EU and us, at this point.

woohoo!!!

ToBeFrank123 wrote: »

woohoo!!! wrote: »

Looking back, the last chance for the UK were the May Corbyn talks. But the principle of FPTP and winner takes all is too deeply ingrained. The behind the scene documentaries on Barnier and Verhofstadt made clear that they couldn't understand why U.K. politics could not come to an agreement over such an important issue, and were less than impressed with remainers essentially blocking a deal. Of course their chief ire was reserved for Brexiteers like Davis.

Johnson for all his bluster is in a very weak position and all this lashing out is akin to death throes. I don't see the UK being capable of sorting out their mess anytime soon. In such a scenario it's hard to see any sort of deal sticking post Brexit.

A backstop with a definitive end would probably have been enough of a fudge to get the WA passed the HoC. They could then move to discussing the type of trade arrangement between the UK and EU. Another fudge would probably have been required to get that through.

People always underestimate the importance of a fudge when it comes to difficult negotiations. It allows all sides to save face and kick some issues down the road for discussion at another time.

The backstop with the process to review is the fudge. The border cannot become a bargaining chip in trade talks which is why any time limit implies that it can be. To give here, crossing red lines means giving at Dover Calais. Such would be unacceptable to France. It comes back to this outdated thinking that the big boys decide things while the smaller ones fall into line. The whole point of the EU with common rules and seats at the table for all PMs of member states is the opposite, deliberately, for what reigned in Europe before (and all those wars with different groups manoeuvring for power).

It is up to the UK to come to a solution, given they're the ones leaving and want a deal with the larger remaining bloc.