Brexit discussion thread X (Please read OP before posting)

Call me Al

pauldla wrote: »

Had a quick look through some of the Brexit groups on FB (Leave Means Leave and Brexit News, to be exact) and the general consensus there is that Johnson did the right thing by not speaking, the 'press conference' was a set-up, and Luxembourg don't produce anything and only sponge off the UK etc etc (things go downhill from there). It's very hard to reach out to that mindset.

I also saw several references to ingratitude after the Brits had to rescue their country from the Germans during WW2, and the fact that since the population there is so small they're an insignificant country..

It's a predictable depressing script at this stage.

Igotadose

54and56 wrote: »

German friend of mine who is a senior guy with a car parts manufacturer told me they have two facilities in the UK employing close to 2,000 people. Their Brexit planning is complete and very straightforward.

Option 1 - If there's a Withdrawal Agreement they carry on with their UK factories.

Option 2 - If there's a No Deal Brexit his immediate job is to shut down both factories straight away. No if's or but's. Hanging around seeing how things may or may not play out in a No Deal Brexit is too risky for them financially. They know what it'll cost them to shut both factories down straight away and move production elsewhere in the group so that is what they have resolved to do.

The decision is made, it's only a question of whether events will trigger Option 1 or Option 2.

Understandable, but wow must suck to be the lad has to fire a couple thousand people. I imagine your friend is fairly highly placed and this is solid info. I don't envy your friend even a little, this is business though. I thought (US experience here) closing facilities in the UK is a 'big deal,' takes a long time and the government, at least in the past, tried to mitigate the impact on the employees, they had long periods of time with some compensation. My experience though is the early 2000's working for a US firm that closed a UK office,as I recall the employees could come to work for 6 weeks on something like full salary to look for jobs via the office computers, etc.

Zubeneschamali

Peregrinus wrote: »

It means - if it means anything - that he has, or thinks he has, a strategy which will prevent the Benn Bill from having its intended effect and result in an extension, but he doesn't want to disclose that strategy in case, once people know what it is, they will find a way to counter it.

I think he wants MPs to think he thinks he has a strategy.

I think he plans to bring May's deal back to Parliament and needs them to believe No Deal is a real threat to try and force them to vote for it at the last minute. So he will pretend to have a No Deal gambit up his sleeve until that vote fails.

Then he will meekly ask for an extension in accordance with the law, and explain all this talk as a negotiating position, had to say that after all, ha ha!

Zubeneschamali

CelticRambler wrote: »

Bettel made reference to a flaw in the Remain campaign in the UK, one which I have previously said applied also to the EU: that not enough was said loudly and clearly about how and why the EU was a force for good in the lives of ordinary UK citizens.

Absolutely. Even today, many Remain voters will say "Of course the EU is an undemocratic bureaucratic centralised nightmare of red tape and imposed laws, but it is better to stay inside and try to reform it than to leave".

Bannasidhe

James Crisp - the Telegraph correspondent in Brussels - is not exactly toeing the Boris was insulted line on his personal twitter.
Highlights include him sharing footage of the hoards of loud protesters - Crisp reckons there's about 75 people, and re-tweeting John Simpson talking about the time Thatcher gave an impromptu presser in Zambia in front of a hostile crowd who she'd been warned might throw acid at her.

Akrasia

Deleted User wrote: »

Bettel, " we will not grant another extension, just for the sake of granting another extension!", Boris will get his no-deal Brexit simply by sitting on his hands!
The letter requesting another extension becomes worthless.

All Boris has to do for the next two weeks is travel around Europe and insult the families and national heroes of the Heads of State of the EU27 in the hope that one of them will hold a grudge and veto an extension

I don't think the EU heads of state are stupid enough to fall for this, but there are probably one or two who are looking for any excuse to veto an extension.

Akrasia

Joe_ Public wrote: »

Have to say he sounded very sincere when he was making that statement so something will likely have to change in the UK for that extension request to stand a better chance. The subtext of it might have been get rid of this PM, force a GE and then you will get your extension, but thats reading between the lines.

The EU knows that the day after the extension is granted, a General election will be announced.

seamus

Igotadose wrote: »

Understandable, but wow must suck to be the lad has to fire a couple thousand people. I imagine your friend is fairly highly placed and this is solid info. I don't envy your friend even a little, this is business though. I thought (US experience here) closing facilities in the UK is a 'big deal,' takes a long time and the government, at least in the past, tried to mitigate the impact on the employees, they had long periods of time with some compensation. My experience though is the early 2000's working for a US firm that closed a UK office,as I recall the employees could come to work for 6 weeks on something like full salary to look for jobs via the office computers, etc.

The requirements are broadly similar in the UK as they are here; the company has minimum compensation to pay, a minimum "consultation" period to enter into, etc etc.

But if the company is closing a facility and there is nowhere to put the staff, then the process is a box-ticking exercise. The costs are quantifiable. Six weeks running costs + redundancy payments. If that works out to a £20m cost, the company takes that hit and offsets it against tax bills and such.

Enzokk

Call me Al wrote: »

I also saw several references to ingratitude after the Brits had to rescue their country from the Germans during WW2, and the fact that since the population there is so small they're an insignificant country..

It's a predictable depressing script at this stage.

Is one of those references Ian Duncan Smith?

https://twitter.com/NinaDSchick/status/1173886965369966593?s=20

The tweet is apt, "we have to be more civil to each other, but you are trying to build a Nazi superstate."

As for Remainers, well the message seems to be even if you win your battle the war is lost because of the last 3 years or so,

https://twitter.com/JenniferMerode/status/1173827015994216449?s=20

"EU diplomat: “Why on earth would you want a country so hopelessly and bitterly divided to stay.” ⁦The EU wants to avoid no-deal, but not at any price"

DOCARCH

Akrasia wrote: »

All Boris has to do for the next two weeks is travel around Europe and insult the families and national heroes of the Heads of State of the EU27 in the hope that one of them will hold a grudge and veto an extension.

That struck me as potentially part of the strategy yesterday. Get to a point where no extension is offered.

Zubeneschamali

Igotadose wrote: »

I recall the employees could come to work for 6 weeks on something like full salary to look for jobs via the office computers, etc.

That might be so in the situation where the employer is still going to operate in the country and needs the good will, or where the likes of the IDA part funded the jobs and they'd have to repay a ton of grant money if they just upped sticks.

But No Deal is going to be very different to normal operations, the mitigation plans are going to be like nothing seen in Europe, well, ever since nothing like this ever happened before. Foreign capital is going to run, not walk out of the country, and there will be nothing coming in until the crash hits bottom and the vultures swoop in.

Akrasia

briany wrote: »

I'd say forcing a 2nd referendum would be a better bet. The opposition have the parliamentary numbers to get this over the line, in theory. Not that the opposition are unified in their thinking - far from it, but as things come to the crunch and real desperate panic sets in, and Boris looks content to know that simple inertia will get Brexit over the line, voting for a 2nd ref would be the move that pulls the UK plane out of its determined nosedive.

A 2nd referendum needs to have a deal on the table. Yes, I know there is a deal on the table now, but Corbyn won't put that to the people because he wants the chance to negotiate his own deal first.

I'd love for a 2nd ref to be called with the options being remain or May's deal because remain would almost certainly win, but Corbyn is a leaver and given the opportunity he will probably get a different deal with different 'red lines' that will change the numbers on a 2nd referendum,

trellheim

The sequencing you see is the issue.

Europe will need to see the deal - i.e if WA2 = WA with NI only backstop then they need to ok that with Barnier and EUCO/Europarl

BUT before that EU wont do squat unless the House of Commons agrees on it FIRST as they have been led up the garden path

THEREFORE all the shenanigans will happen in the next few weeks IF they are serious

1. The only way to get a deal is to compress
2. Therefore they are running down the clock
3. The numbers game means they will need to force Labour to abstain or vote with WA2 and it will need to be a straight up or down vote

Since prorogue ends 14 october and EUCO is 17th October I am scratching my head here as Queens speech debates normally take up the next day that is super-compressed times .... I just can't see it to ram stuff through like that.

Call me Al

Igotadose wrote: »

Understandable, but wow must suck to be the lad has to fire a couple thousand people. I imagine your friend is fairly highly placed and this is solid info. I don't envy your friend even a little, this is business though. I thought (US experience here) closing facilities in the UK is a 'big deal,' takes a long time and the government, at least in the past, tried to mitigate the impact on the employees, they had long periods of time with some compensation. My experience though is the early 2000's working for a US firm that closed a UK office,as I recall the employees could come to work for 6 weeks on something like full salary to look for jobs via the office computers, etc.

Just musing to myself here but i wonder what will UK employment law and worker's rights look like in the event of a no-deal brexit w.r.t large scale redundancies and job transfers. Has the government said they'll maintain these rights going forward?

https://www.google.com/amp/s/europa.eu/youreurope/business/human-resources/employment-contracts/redundancies/indexamp_en.htm

Seth Brundle

CelticRambler wrote: »

Remember: for another 44 days, the 50m Brits who didn't vote or Brexit are EU citizens too.

Actually, for the next 44 days, all Brits are EU citizens regardless of how they they voted (or even if they didn't have the opportunity to vote)

Zubeneschamali

DOCARCH wrote: »

That struck me as potentially part of the strategy yesterday. Get to a point where no extension is offered.

He isn't playing 4 dimensional chess, he is just really, really bad at his job, same as he was a really bad Foreign Minister, MP, Mayor and journalist.

The only thing he is good at is making people think he is good at things in spite of the abundant proof that he is useless.

Winters

knipex wrote: »

Apparently the people booing him were British. In the main British migrants but British none the less.

I fixed your post for you.

Enzokk

For anyone looking for a link, here is the Supreme Court hearing on youtube - Guardian page.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cDH4TGDMvFw

Zubeneschamali

Akrasia wrote: »

I'd love for a 2nd ref to be called with the options being remain or May's deal because remain would almost certainly win, but Corbyn is a leaver and given the opportunity he will probably get a different deal with different 'red lines' that will change the numbers on a 2nd referendum,

Corbyn isn't going to win an overall majority, and the LibDems are not going to leave No Deal hanging over everyones heads for a year while Corbyn negotiates a new Lexit deal that the LibDems are going to campaign against anyhow.

So after the election, the price of the LibDems going onto a coalition will be a prompt referendum with May's Deal vs. Remain. (The SNP will extract a timeline for a new Indyref for their support).

Akrasia

knipex wrote: »

I sincerely doubt it. Corbyn is toxic to large swathes of voters.

No Matter who the Labour leader is, they will be character assassinated by the UK press and the troll army

If Labour were clever they would announce a change of leader the day before an election, so that all of the Tory campaigning which will be entirely focused on how bad Corbyn is, would be immediately neutralised, and they wouldn't have the time to poison the public against whoever the new Labour leader happened to be.

Chances of this happening are zero due to the egos and personalities involved

lawred2

Enzokk wrote: »

For anyone looking for a link, here is the Supreme Court hearing on youtube - Guardian page.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cDH4TGDMvFw

Don't know why but I feel like the only likely outcome is one that falls on the side of government..

54and56

Igotadose wrote: »

Understandable, but wow must suck to be the lad has to fire a couple thousand people. I imagine your friend is fairly highly placed and this is solid info.

Yes, he's late 40's with 20 years experience in the company. Not Board level but just below. Senior exec with a lot of responsibility. He was here a few months ago so had pints with him and he was crystal clear, there was zero doubt or hesitation. It was a binary decision, WA = keep things as they are, No Deal = exit the UK (from a production perspective) as quickly as possible.

Igotadose wrote: »

I don't envy your friend even a little, this is business though. I thought (US experience here) closing facilities in the UK is a 'big deal,' takes a long time and the government, at least in the past, tried to mitigate the impact on the employees, they had long periods of time with some compensation. My experience though is the early 2000's working for a US firm that closed a UK office,as I recall the employees could come to work for 6 weeks on something like full salary to look for jobs via the office computers, etc.

They are a very well established German company so will do things by the book. They won't have taken the decision lightly but they know (or are very confident) a No Deal Brexit would be such a disaster that shutting down is the correct commercial decision to make.

Zubeneschamali

lawred2 wrote: »

Don't know why but I feel like the only likely outcome is one that falls on the side of government..

The facts and arguments are clearly against the Government, I would be very surprised if the court rules in their favour.

Akrasia

Mr.Nice Guy wrote: »

While I enjoyed Bettel introducing a dose of reality, I can't help but feel this was a tactical misstep. We all know Johnson and co. are preparing to play the blame game and no doubt the Brexiters will seize on this as evidence of the EU's unacceptable attitude. Even listening to Channel 4 news earlier they were talking about how Bettel was making the most of his moment.

You have to remember that the Brexiteers don't particularly care about the truth. They can spin any event to put forward whatever narrative they decide to peddle.

Boris Johnson compared the EU to hitler in 2016, but when Juncker described May's strategy as 'nebulous' the brexiteers had a meltdown. https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/may/16/tories-divided-by-boris-johnsons-eu-hitler-comparison

There is no such thing as a sense of perspective when you're prepared to lie and spin everything because you're treating the future of Europe as a game where you can cheat your way to victory

Imreoir2

Enzokk wrote: »

The humiliation that May had to endure at the hands of the EU at one of the summits (I believe) was also supposed to shore up some support for her out of sympathy and her reaction was going to be a catalyst, but nothing changed because the facts didn't change. Johnson is still a liar and cannot be trusted, just one that was shown up for a coward in public whereas before he could bluff his way around a little.

As for those facts, Faisal Islam has a thread about business and their reaction to no-deal,

https://twitter.com/faisalislam/status/1173700895336521731?s=20

Uncertainty reigns in the UK and we know business doesn't like that. He goes on in the thread to look at research The IOD (Institute of Directors) has done and there are some interesting tweets.

https://twitter.com/faisalislam/status/1173707244053118977?s=20

That is on relocation's, seems that just about 2/3rds aren't planning to relocate but the rest are planning to, have already drawn up plans or are in the process of doing so.

Just over 1/3 are considering relocating and for more than half of that 1 in three (thats roughly 1 in 6 of the total for those of you who dont remember how to multiply fractions) relocation means moving a sizable portion of operation out of the UK or shuting down their UK operations.

Can anyone here imagine any government in Ireland following a policy that would mean over 15% of busnesses relocating out of the country?

Enzokk

lawred2 wrote: »

Don't know why but I feel like the only likely outcome is one that falls on the side of government..

It could be, but if they do what is to stop any future leader asking prorogation for 6 months while they avoid scrutiny if there is a crises in parliament? That will be the result if they decide that the reason for prorogation is not a matter for the courts.

I think you may be correct, but if it does come to this I hope they find that Johnson did mislead the Queen even if there is nothing they are willing to do about it. At the very least then it means it is on record that he is a liar.

Also, it could be that if they find prorogation is not a matter for the courts then Johnson can go to the Queen on the 16th October and ask to prorogue parliament again. She has no mandate to refuse as she has very little power and then parliament cannot hold the PM to account for not sending the letter, result no-deal and in a country where parliament is sovereign it means it is actually powerless.

It will be an interesting few days and I will not claim to understand any of it until the analysis of those that will know more.

lawred2

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

The facts and arguments are clearly against the Government, I would be very surprised if the court rules in their favour.

The English courts did - well they ruled that the workings of Parliament were not for the courts to interfere with..

It's entirely possible for the SC to take the same line of reasoning

54and56

Enzokk wrote: »

For anyone looking for a link, here is the Supreme Court hearing on youtube - Guardian page.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cDH4TGDMvFw

Fascinating viewing.

Bit embarrassing that the QC currently on his feet has a different "bundle" of documents to the Judges so they struggle to find content he is referencing

Nemesis

Wonder if there was mischief with the documents.

Akrasia

briany wrote: »

As much as I'm loath to say this, I can see Boris's and Laura's point. It would be virtually impossible for him to hold a press conference and look statesmanlike when you have protesters chanting right in his face, and it completely nullifies all chances of the presser looking any way even-handed, before even a word is said. If Bettel had come to Britain, and had to do a presser with a loud group of Brexiteers chanting away only feet from him, would've he been enthusiastic?

That said, it was a dumb tweet to put out.

Every single press conference outside 10 downing street for the past 3 years has been delivered to the background music of 'Stooop Breexit' from the heroic and dedicated permanent protest camp around the corner on the public street.


If Johnson was the orator that he claims to be, he would have been able to take the protest with dignity and rise above it.

Johnson is 100% responsible for the protests he is facing everywhere he goes

1. He lied his way through the Brexit referendum campaign
2. He disrupted all of May's attempts to get a deal passed to leave the EU
3. He is pretending to negotiate with the EU for a new deal but is transparently not doing so (more lies to the public as PM this time)
4. He has Shut down the UK parliament to try to force through a No deal which is opposed by every single democratic institution in the UK.