Brexit discussion thread X (Please read OP before posting)

bobmalooka

Quin_Dub wrote: »

The path out is clear - Shift on their totally incompatible Red Lines or go for the Irish sea border option.

They have all the options - The EU have no room to move to protect the SM and the EU as a whole.

If the UK want out , they have to make the move.

This is something that gets missed a lot - we’ve all sniggered at the UK pissing on their own international standing over the last few years but they actually achieved a lot in the WA.

They’ve pushed the EU to the limit (split the free movement principles) while preserving their own aggressive red lines. EU actually has nothing left to give while UK has loads of flexibility.

It’s their insistence on forcing the scenario to have a visible winner/loser dynamic after extracting an objectively good agreement (in the context).
Plenty of EU nations were unhappy with the concessions made and only agreed as Ireland wanted a solution - they’ll be delighted to see UK crash out instead.

JC01

lawred2 wrote: »

that thread is some craic

especially this lad who thinks power can only exist in one realm

https://twitter.com/MAN_TOGA_SRS_AJ/status/1163766704293515264

them are their comic book gunboat fantasies

That thread is gold.

The irony of the hardline brexit supporters banging on about aircraft carriers and nuclear weapons while completely oblivious to the fact that brexit poses the single biggest threat to the UKs naval bases in Scotland is possibly the highlight.

As an aside, I think Varadkar and Coveney have handled themselves brilliantly during the last two months as Cummings PR machine has really ramped bio up its anti-Irish efforts.

In another ironic twist I think Brexit is doing a massive amount for raising awareness of the benefits of EU membership to the Irish voter. Has anyone come across any figures for sentiment towards the EU amongst Irish people since 2016?

Varta

Bit cynical wrote: »

I may not be following you but my reading of Merkel's statement is that although the WA won't be reopened, the EU who would previously have refused to discuss practical solutions to the border on the basis that the border issue was already settled in the WA, can now move on from the WA and discuss practical solutions.

Is it reopening the WA? No. The WA will remain as a piece of text unaltered (and unratified by the UK). But both sides will now move on from it at least in the area of the border.

If we recall, both Varadkar and Coveney were in the strange position of not being able to talk about what they were going to do on our side of the border in the event of no deal. They had to continually insist that the solution would come from the UK ratifying the WA. Now it can be discussed.

No, they cannot move on until the WA is accepted by the UK.

Quin_Dub

bobmalooka wrote: »

This is something that gets missed a lot - we’ve all sniggered at the UK pissing on their own international standing over the last few years but they actually achieved a lot in the WA.

They’ve pushed the EU to the limit (split the free movement principles) while preserving their own aggressive red lines. EU actually has nothing left to give while UK has loads of flexibility.

It’s their insistence on forcing the scenario to have a visible winner/loser dynamic after extracting an objectively good agreement (in the context).
Plenty of EU nations were unhappy with the concessions made and only agreed as Ireland wanted a solution - they’ll be delighted to see UK crash out instead.

Exactly - The WA is an absolute cracker of a deal for the UK. No other 3rd country on earth would get anything even close to that deal, and they've got Ireland to thank for that. - Or at least concerns for Irelands needs.

If they do crash out , the deal they get afterwards will still have a backstop but will be much much worse for them.

Their failure to recognise that is hubris of staggering proportions.

Kermit.de.frog

Bit cynical wrote: »

I may not be following you but my reading of Merkel's statement is that although the WA won't be reopened, the EU who would previously have refused to discuss practical solutions to the border on the basis that the border issue was already settled in the WA, can now move on from the WA and discuss practical solutions.

Is it reopening the WA? No. The WA will remain as a piece of text unaltered (and unratified by the UK). But both sides will now move on from it at least in the area of the border.

If we recall, both Varadkar and Coveney were in the strange position of not being able to talk about what they were going to do on our side of the border in the event of no deal. They had to continually insist that the solution would come from the UK ratifying the WA. Now it can be discussed.

I'm not following you.

The WA is the agreement and it will be ratified or there will be no deal.

Alternative arrangements are catered for in the agreement but the EU estimates at the earliest they are 10 - 15 years away. Backstop in place unless and until they exist.

Nothing has changed at all.

bobmalooka

Bit cynical wrote: »

I may not be following you but my reading of Merkel's statement is that although the WA won't be reopened, the EU who would previously have refused to discuss practical solutions to the border on the basis that the border issue was already settled in the WA, can now move on from the WA and discuss practical solutions.

Is it reopening the WA? No. The WA will remain as a piece of text unaltered (and unratified by the UK). But both sides will now move on from it at least in the area of the border.

If we recall, both Varadkar and Coveney were in the strange position of not being able to talk about what they were going to do on our side of the border. Now it can be discussed.

Which would be a bit pointless from UK’s position - why would they discuss keeping border open (pretty much their only negotiating leverage) as a stand alone issue?

I think you may be inferring more from what was said than was intended.

EU identified border issue as UKs Trojan horse years ago - UK won’t get anything of substance without fixing it first

prawnsambo

Bit cynical wrote: »

I may not be following you but my reading of Merkel's statement is that although the WA won't be reopened, the EU who would previously have refused to discuss practical solutions to the border on the basis that the border issue was already settled in the WA, can now move on from the WA and discuss practical solutions.

When has this happened? What particular solutions have they refused to look at?

Bit cynical wrote: »

Is it reopening the WA? No. The WA will remain as a piece of text unaltered (and unratified by the UK). But both sides will now move on from it at least in the area of the border.

This is contradictory and sounds like wishful thinking. You can't move on to discussing parts of the WA without re-opening it or dump the WA and move on to discuss what? The WA is how you get out of the EU. In one piece.

Bit cynical wrote: »

If we recall, both Varadkar and Coveney were in the strange position of not being able to talk about what they were going to do on our side of the border. Now it can be discussed.

And we'll be waiting for that to happen imminently...

prawnsambo

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

Finland, which currently holds the EU's rotating presidency, has also ruled out reopening the WA today.

https://yle.fi/uutiset/osasto/news/finland_eu_reject_uk_pms_bid_to_re-open_brexit_deal/10930044

Finland who are also currently acting as proxies for the UK in the EU.

Jim2007

Bit cynical wrote: »

It doesn't undermine the WA. That is more or less dead anyway. But on the issue of the border, it means that practical solutions can be discussed by both sides. Hitherto, only Johnson was suggesting this was the case. We were forced to insist that the WA (which had been rejected in the UK parliament) was the only way.

You are reading far too much into something that is not there. No a word of the WA will be changed because to do so would open up the EU to challenges to the other trade agreements they have signed. What happens if Canada or Japan becomes unhappy with the clause in their agreement that requires them to get EU agreement before they can offer a similar deal to the UK for instance???

The deal is done, it's not going to change and it is now up the UK to figure out what they want to do.

fash

Bit cynical wrote: »

Not sure what you mean exactly but I think the problem from the UK side was that the backstop, once agreed to, could be kept in place by the EU simply rejecting indefinitely any alternative proposals if they wished.

Obviously from our side, the backstop, had it been ratified would have been a fantastic solution. The problem is that it was not going to be ratified leading to the current deadlock and a worse situation than had it never been proposed in the first place.


Merkel's announcement changes this. Obviously Johnson will be pleased but I think also our leaders who had dug themselves into a bit of a hole. We have been given permission to no longer insist on the WA as the only solution to NI border.

No I just read Merkel as making a statement undermining the UK propaganda that the EU is being intransigent - as preparation for no deal and to reduce UK scope to blame the evil EU.

trellheim

Where in Johnson's statement does it say

"I guarantee WA will pass without the backstop, I've got the numbers and Rees-Mogg and the ERG are on board with it ", done deal on Sept 4th, the Moggster as leader of the house is bringing WA back to a vote 4th September , what do you say ?

BluePlanet

J Mysterio wrote: »

Financial Times: Punishing Ireland’s economy will backfire on Brexiters

https://amp.ft.com/content/eaae31b2-c004-11e9-9381-78bab8a70848?__twitter_impression=true

Paywalled

prawnsambo

BluePlanet wrote: »

Paywalled

It's also on MSN Money. You often find that articles like this are carried by more than one outlet. Always a good idea to google the headline.

Laois_Man

Johnson still pratting on about solving all the Irish border issues in the trade agreement after exit

Border checks are unnecessary for either the UK or the Eu


https://twitter.com/SkyNews/status/1163854856693698561


"I think we'll get there and I am going to go at it with a lot of umpf"

briany

Worrying shift in rhetoric. Pivoting to the idea of what can be done after a no-deal Brexit has occurred. Corbyn's on the same kick with that plan of Labour's to reverse Brexit after it has happened.

Tikki Wang Wang

Laois_Man wrote: »

Johnson still pratting on about solving all the Irish border issues in the trade agreement after exit

Border checks are unnecessary for either the UK or the Eu


https://twitter.com/SkyNews/status/1163854856693698561


"I think we'll get there and I am going to go at it with a lot of umpf"

Like May he is already starting to visibley age

Laois_Man

briany wrote: »

Worrying shift in rhetoric. Pivoting to the idea of what can be done after a no-deal Brexit has occurred.

Johnson was saying the same during the Tory leadership campaign

Strazdas

briany wrote: »

Worrying shift in rhetoric. Pivoting to the idea of what can be done after a no-deal Brexit has occurred. Corbyn's on the same kick with that plan of Labour's to reverse Brexit after it has happened.

It might in fact be the only way to move things on. Many in the UK seem hell bent on No Deal (it's unclear what Johnson really thinks).

lawred2

Bit cynical wrote: »

I may not be following you but my reading of Merkel's statement is that although the WA won't be reopened, the EU who would previously have refused to discuss practical solutions to the border on the basis that the border issue was already settled in the WA, can now move on from the WA and discuss practical solutions.

Is it reopening the WA? No. The WA will remain as a piece of text unaltered (and unratified by the UK). But both sides will now move on from it at least in the area of the border.

If we recall, both Varadkar and Coveney were in the strange position of not being able to talk about what they were going to do on our side of the border in the event of no deal. They had to continually insist that the solution would come from the UK ratifying the WA. Now it can be discussed.

The EU has never refused to discuss practical solutions to the backstop.

Problem is is that they have not been presented with a practical alternative to that backstop.

You're position is based on a falsehood

Kermit.de.frog

In no deal UK will be back at the table within days - same issues will still be there: border, money, citizens. EU has stated this fact already but of course they don't listen.

briany

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

In no deal UK will be back at the table within days - same issues will still be there: border, money, citizens. EU has stated this fact already but of course they don't listen.

They'd be far too proud to go back that quickly. It probably wouldn't be Johnson's government doing it either, and any UK government has the continuing problem of half its electorate blaming all bad things on the EU, including the potential economic disaster caused by no-deal. How a government goes back to the EU without the red tops screaming supplication and being voted out in short order is hard to know.

Strazdas

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

In no deal UK will be back at the table within days - same issues will still be there: border, money, citizens. EU has stated this fact already but of course they don't listen.

I get the impression the more looney elements think this will somehow strengthen the UK's hand. They think the EU will be desperate for a deal and will ditch the backstop.

serfboard

Strazdas wrote: »

Many in the UK seem hell bent on No Deal (it's unclear what Johnson really thinks).

The problem with Johnson's rhetoric is that no-deal is now being sold as almost the "best" solution, and anything less will then be seen as insufficient by those who don't really understand what no-deal is.

I'd love for someone to do a Vox pop asking the British public what they think no-deal means.

Kermit.de.frog

I'm curious as to why the Telegraph twitter account dragged up Nick Timothy's article on Varadkar being to blame for threatening peace from July today and tweeted it out.

Another salvo incoming from the Tory press no doubt.

Water John

Where else was this going with Cummings steering the boat?
Once Johnson picked him to head No 10 one knew what was destined to happen.

Basically you got, 'write some drivel over to Tusk and make sure he cannot agree to it'.

Leroy42

Bit Cynical, does the WA not state that there is a transition period during which effectively nothing changes and the Backstop only comes into effect if nothing can be agreed prior to the end of that period?

Unless and until. So if alternatives can be found prior to the end of the transition then no need for the backstop.

What did Merkel say today, or even Johnson's letter, to change that in your view?

amacca

Just watching channel 4 news there, surprised that they described the EUs reaction as furious

Really? What's furious about it, the reaction was simply a restating of the position/facts ... couldn't be any more professional

They probably should be furious given behaviour of UK side but that wouldn't be wise.

Neale Richmond on now singing to the hymn sheet thankfully.

J Mysterio

serfboard wrote: »

The problem with Johnson's rhetoric is that no-deal is now being sold as almost the "best" solution, and anything less will then be seen as insufficient by those who don't really understand what no-deal is.

I'd love for someone to do a Vox pop asking the British public what they think no-deal means.

Everyone is failing in this. Brexit has completely paralysed the country into a kind of stupefied, idiotic, semi intelligible state.

Politicians are routinely failing and making huge gaffes. The police are failing to investigate criminal elements of Brexit and hold them to account while the judiciary sit on their hands and the Media are all over the shop.

There is obviously lots of good reporting, but there is no regulation on the bad reporting. This way everyone has their 'facts' and reality, though one might be logical and developed and the other might be based on nasty, meaningless soundbites.

Then, with social media echo chambers - follow me/ ban those of a different view - people indoctrinate themselves further. It is like Idiocracy, people are getting more stupid and the system is failing them.

J Mysterio

The Guardian editorial on Boris and his letter.

If there is any fragile encouragement to be squeezed out of Boris Johnson’s letter to the European Union this week, it is perhaps the fact that he wrote it at all. After four weeks of acting as if the EU does not exist, the existence of the letter is at least an implied recognition that the relationship with the EU matters. For nearly a month, Mr Johnson’s government has also promoted the fiction that a no-deal Brexit is an acceptable prospect for Britain. So when Mr Johnson starts his letter by saying that he very much hopes the UK will be leaving with a deal, it is just about possible to muster some carefully guarded optimism that he may actually mean it.

Yet the content of what he wrote makes a mockery of any such conclusion. In fact it is difficult to see how Mr Johnson could have done less than he does in the letter to Donald Tusk. At the core of the letter is the statement that the Irish backstop is not viable. The letter then excoriates the backstop as undemocratic, a brake on UK trade and regulatory policy and a threat to the Northern Ireland peace process. In most respects, this is the opposite of the truth. In some ways it is downright mischievous. The letter is more like one of Mr Johnson’s fact-free and irresponsible newspaper concoctions than a serious diplomatic approach to solving an impasse that imminently threatens British economic stability, trade, jobs, constitutional cohesion and security.

prawnsambo

serfboard wrote: »

The problem with Johnson's rhetoric is that no-deal is now being sold as almost the "best" solution, and anything less will then be seen as insufficient by those who don't really understand what no-deal is.

I'd love for someone to do a Vox pop asking the British public what they think no-deal means.

I'm suspicious of the no deal rhetoric. Because it's coming with conveniently and regularly leaked no deal Armageddon briefing papers. I'm mindful of Sir Humphrey Appleby's aphorism that the ship of state is the only ship that leaks from the top. So you have brave Sir Boris boldly (but reluctantly) prepared to lead his country into no deal brexitland and simultaneously telling them of all the perils that lie before them there. He's setting himeself as all things to all brexiters.