Brexit discussion thread X (Please read OP before posting)

Peregrinus

PTH2009 wrote: »

Going on a trip to England on the 8th Nov

Is before the 31st Oct or after the best time to change euros into pounds ?

Depends on what happens on 31st October.

GM228

ath262 wrote: »

Farage speaking at EU parliament at the moment - cant even listed to him anymore....

https://twitter.com/StickMan_v7/status/1174242352522780674?s=19


I liked Juncker's opening words - "this house is open and in action and not prorogued".

And then Esteban González Pons saying he will speak English today:-

https://twitter.com/MollyMEP/status/1174237286990528518?s=19

And then of course we have Martina Anderson discussing the GFA wearing the Ireland jersey:-

https://twitter.com/JoeyMillar/status/1174237297832792064?s=19

54and56

PTH2009 wrote: »

Going on a trip to England on the 8th Nov

Is before the 31st Oct or after the best time to change euros into pounds ?

If you think there'll be a deal then now is probably the time to change as a deal will provide confidence and likely (IMHO) strengthen Sterling. The opposite will apply if there's a no deal in which case Sterling may drop significantly Nov 1st / 2nd and you'll get more £'s for your €'s at that stage.

ambro25

PTH2009 wrote: »

Going on a trip to England on the 8th Nov

Is before the 31st Oct or after the best time to change euros into pounds ?

I have my Brit mother-in-law coming to stay with us here in Lux next week or the week after, with plans to drive over with her in late Dec for spending Xmas there (we've alternated Xmases between our UK and FR families for decades).

But I've already warned the Mrs that we may end up not going after all, depending on what happens come end October, that we're not going to book anything until 1st Nov at the earliest. Needless to say, that particular conversation didn't end too well.

So long as no deal Brexit on Halloween remains a possibility, I'm actually less scared of ending up having to keep my M-i-L here (for her sake/in her best interest), than of experiencing strife whilst in the UK (Lux reg.plates and very noticeable car) and/or getting caught in chaos (petrol shortages, ferry queues, civil strife, etc.), never mind how best to game the forex rate.

ElectronVolt

I encountered a couple of companies that have banned all but absolutely unavoidable travel to the UK for the first week of November.

I really don't think the UK media is understanding how serious this is getting. It's still all a parlour game and abstract debate if you read the UK commentary, but it's starting to have very real consequences.

J Mysterio

ilovesmybrick wrote: »

I think the issue is that Johnson is a populist, he has spent years as the class clown as he realised that buffonery made him a popular fellow with the UK voter. Unfortunately that has brought him beyond the limits of his ability, and we have seen how poorly he's equipped to deal with voters on the UK streets confronting him with genuine concerns as he's not able to deal with people not liking him or having a contrary viewpoint that can't be dissuaged with bluster.

Now he's coming face to face with serious politicians that he spent years disparaging, insulting, and dismissing for the sake of popularity back in the UK. And they have neither the time nor the patience to put up with his BoJo act.

That seems to be it in a nutshell, well said.

Bannasidhe

ElectronVolt wrote: »

I encountered a couple of companies that have banned all but absolutely unavoidable travel to the UK for the first week of November.

I really don't think the UK media is understanding how serious this is getting. It's still all a parlour game and abstract debate if you read the UK commentary, but it's starting to have very real consequences.

I am getting the distinct impression from Leavers that I know in the UK that they believe come Oct 31st and a No Deal crash out that the clock will just be magically set back to trade/travel conditions as they were prior to Jan 1973.
Try to explain that the UK economy during the intervening years was based on a series of EU trade deals, the Single Market, etc etc and those cannot be either dismissed as of no consequence or ignored as unimportant is... well... insane and it becomes like talking to Vicky Pollard. And that's before we even get onto talking about what the GFA means in real terms.

Personally, I think leaving the EU was a very very bad Idea but I can understand how, after decades of misinformation, the UK electorate voted for it by a narrow margin, and if they want to leave then leave them to it.
But crashing out without having made any real contingency plans to deal with the very very serious repercussions is utter madness.

Imreoir2

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

If you want to accept the trouble (and probable violence) that would go with such surrender of national independence then go for it.

I'm 100% certain any such proposal would see Ireland leaving the EU.

Or we will have to take an outer orbit with the bloc as an alternative. Like Norway.

This could come A LOT sooner than any such treaty though if as I suspect our taxation policies come under attack by the EU.

I have given my opinion. Can we return to topic now?

The only way it could happen is if the Irish people accept it. Do you think we would accept it by referendum and then there would be violence and we would leave? Seems somewhat unlikely.

IAmTheReign

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

Really, are Iceland - or Switzerland - or Norway - or New Zealand etc casualties?

Don't pull this absolute rubbish that we need to be in the EU.

We don't.

As things stand it's fine but notions of superstate then we need to leave. (and we would leave in my opinion)

You realise all three of the countries you mention are at the mercy of larger players right? Iceland and Switzerland rely on the EU and NZ relies on China.

Iceland is a member of the EEA and Switzerland is tied to the EU through multiple bilateral agreements. Both countries are effectively forced to follow EU rules without having any say in making them.

New Zealand is a relative backwater compared to Ireland. Their GDP per capita is half Irelands and their entire economy is based on exporting agricultural products at prices set by the likes of China.

54and56

And this is just a small ripple of the economic tsunami which will hot the UK if there's a no deal Brexit - Car dealer Pendragon predicts bleak year as it reports first-half loss

https://www.theguardian.com/business/2019/sep/18/pendragon-bleak-outlook-year-first-half-loss-jobs-uncertainty?CMP=Share_AndroidApp_Copy_to_clipboard

trellheim

Boris is no fool. RIGHT now the ground is being prepared for a high pressure WA2=NI backstop minus with no other option theres a number of twitter threads with this as focus currently. The numbers will be razor edge.

At the moment Barnier and Juncker are saying "nothing has been given to us" as they havent' been officially given anything. What I reckon has happened is they've been shown WA2 = NI backstop with some give from ROI .

My question at the mo is if we give up on backstop (and I keep on coming back to this ) the border issue cant be solved .

Personally Im of the view of sort it now or hard border it otherwise we will get shafted by UK down the line - and isnt this the line our govt has taken as well ? Interesting to watch Govt rhetoric on this as we roll toward a GE

Igotadose

Brit living in Luxembourg explains the impact of Brexit in a tweet thread here: https://twitter.com/mediawhizz/status/1173648159479914496

Summary quote: "So this is more than a pro EU protest - it’s more of a ‘pro my life, you don’t get to mess with my family as a political football you cavalier cynical charlatan’ kind of protest.

And it is deeply personal. And it also doesn’t fit on the side of a bus."

And, as has been repeatedly pointed out on this thread, Brexit day +1 isn't magic. Michel Barnier said it succintly: "Mr Barnier said the EU was “open to any UK proposal and are willing to work day and night towards progress”, adding: “If the UK leaves without a deal, I would recall that these questions don’t just disappear"

So, yeah, want a trade agreement? Here's your backstop, citizen's rights and, oh, if you haven't paid us, the bill you still owe. Now, lets talk about trade for the next 10 years before signing anything.

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brexit-michel-barnier-boris-johnson-deal-eu-latest-a9109806.html

reslfj

Cookie_Monster wrote: »

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

Iceland and New Zealand don't have strong national resources actually. Neither does Switzerland.

NZ has plenty; oil & gas, coal, gold, gigantic iron sand reserves, forestry, dairy, hydro power...

Iceland has a 200 nm exclusive fishing zone in almost all directions - remember the cod war. Very much a natural resource. Iceland has agreed zero tariff export quotas with the EU.

And Iceland has plenty inexpensive energy from hydro power and from thermal volcanic energy. Aluminium is produced on Iceland using the inexpensive electricity. (Bitcoins etc. are 'mined' in Iceland too,)

But Iceland has many private citizens with a large debt (in or from pre 2008 loans in foreign currencies) as a result of the crash of the Icelandic crown.

Lars

Strazdas

Bannasidhe wrote: »

I am getting the distinct impression from Leavers that I know in the UK that they believe come Oct 31st and a No Deal crash out that the clock will just be magically set back to trade/travel conditions as they were prior to Jan 1973.
Try to explain that the UK economy during the intervening years was based on a series of EU trade deals, the Single Market, etc etc and those cannot be either dismissed as of no consequence or ignored as unimportant is... well... insane and it becomes like talking to Vicky Pollard. And that's before we even get onto talking about what the GFA means in real terms.

Personally, I think leaving the EU was a very very bad Idea but I can understand how, after decades of misinformation, the UK electorate voted for it by a narrow margin, and if they want to leave then leave them to it.
But crashing out without having made any real contingency plans to deal with the very very serious repercussions is utter madness.

The problem for them is that the Europe and world of December 1972 no longer even exists. Far from resetting the clock, they are turning the UK into an isolationist state with few friends and allies.

ElectronVolt

reslfj wrote: »

Iceland has a 200 nm exclusive fishing zone in almost all directions - remember the cod war. Very much a natural resource. Iceland has agreed zero tariff export quotas with the EU.

And Iceland has plenty inexpensive energy from hydro power and from thermal volcanic energy. Aluminium is produced on Iceland using the inexpensive electricity. (Bitcoins etc. are 'mined' in Iceland too,)

But Iceland has many private citizens with a large debt (in or from pre 2008 loans in foreign currencies) as a result of the crash of the Icelandic crown.

Lars

It also has a total population slightly more than half the size of County Cork. It's not a remotely reasonable comparison with a country of 66 million, or almost any country other than many Greenland. Relatively modest natural resources and a Cork City sized economy is enough to sustain Iceland very comfortably.

robinph

Cookie_Monster wrote: »

NZ has plenty; oil & gas, coal, gold, gigantic iron sand reserves, forestry, dairy, hydro power...

Does dairy, or even forestry, really count as much of a national resource to have at hand? If you've got the climate to grow grass then you can grow cows, or similar for trees. Likewise both could be wiped out in a relatively short time by the wrong infestation.

Things buried in the ground that you've not got round to digging up yet are the national resources a country has. Sun/ rain/ wind/ tide/ mountains in various combinations allow you to create the other things such as forestry, dairy, hydro, solar etc if the country has the motivation to do so.

J Mysterio

Corbyn: 'i'll stay neutral and let the people decide'.

"Leadership".

Peregrinus

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

Really, are Iceland - or Switzerland - or Norway - or New Zealand etc casualties?

Don't pull this absolute rubbish that we need to be in the EU.

We don't.

All three countries have entered into very close relationships with their major trading partners in which they sacrifice fiscal and regulatory autonomy for economic integration - Iceland and Switzerland with the EU; New Zealand with Australia. And two of the three have entered into close military alliances in which their forces are committed to the defence of other countries, and may be commanded by commanders from other countries.

Really, they're all counter-examples to the wisdom or viablity of separating yourself from your neighbours.

If push comes to shove, we don't need to be in the EU. But we do need a relationship with the EU that looks quite a lot like being in the the EU.

Enzokk

Liz Truss, I wonder if this is a case of testing how much pushback they will receive if they go against other court orders. If there isn't any action for her, what is to stop Johnson from ignoring a court order to send the extension letter as per the law?

Liz Truss should resign over illegal Saudi arms sales, say MPs

The international trade secretary, Liz Truss, is facing calls to resign after admitting the government breached a court order banning the sale of weapons to Saudi Arabia.

In a landmark ruling in June, the court of appeal ruled UK arms sales to Saudi Arabia were illegal because they could be used in violations of international law in the conflict in Yemen.

Following the ruling, Truss’s predecessor, Liam Fox, pledged to halt Saudi arms sales pending a review. On Monday night, Truss admitted two “inadvertent” breaches of that commitment and apologised to a Commons committee.

These two offences weren't for millions of GBP worth of equipment, but the principle is that they ignored the courts in this case. There surely has to be action, if only parliament could act...

As for further Truss news, this is interesting as a precedent for FTA with the rest of the world for the UK

https://twitter.com/matthewlesh/status/1174241535568809985?s=20

I am sure that India will be sitting up with peaked interest in what deal Australia can get.

VinLieger

J Mysterio wrote: »

Corbyn: 'i'll stay neutral and let the people decide'.

"Leadership".

He is absolute garbage.


How people still cannot grasp that he wants out of the EU just as much as the ERG, albeit for different but equally selfish reasons imo, I cannot understand

Enzokk

J Mysterio wrote: »

Corbyn: 'i'll stay neutral and let the people decide'.

"Leadership".

In fairness, he can't win. If he back Remain he will be accused of being a leaver and will not be 100% behind the cause - see 2016. If he backs Leave he will be accused of slowing down the Labour response all along and this is proof.

He stays neutral, and he lacks leadership.

Edit:

VinLieger wrote: »

He is absolute garbage.


How people still cannot grasp that he wants out of the EU just as much as the ERG, albeit for different but equally selfish reasons imo, I cannot understand

See above, what position can he take that will not invite any criticism?

J Mysterio

Have some courage of his convictions and be honest with what he believes and argue for it. He is using smoke and mirrors, playing mind games, same as Johnson. They are all a disgrace.

Winters

ministers have said they are reluctant to reveal the details of new proposals in advance for fear they will be "rubbished" by the EU.

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-49738897

And why, UK diplomats, do you think the EU will rubbish those proposals?

LeinsterDub

Enzokk wrote: »

In fairness, he can't win. If he back Remain he will be accused of being a leaver and will not be 100% behind the cause - see 2016. If he backs Leave he will be accused of slowing down the Labour response all along and this is proof.

He stays neutral, and he lacks leadership.

Edit:



See above, what position can he take that will not invite any criticism?

Leadership is to attract criticism of your positions and policies. Not being all things to all people

Enzokk

LeinsterDub wrote: »

Leadership is to attract criticism of your positions and policies. Not being all things to all people

I agree that his positions on Brexit has been awful and takes some blame for this mess, but to ignore that he probably is a Brexiter but in charge of a Remain party is not easy. Yes he could resign but what does that solve for him or Labour? There are other reasons he is leader and they are not Brexit related, whether we agree with them or not.

So in the nuanced position that he is in, what is wrong with a neutral position in a second referendum? If he goes for Leave and they win and his voters get burned he will be blamed, if he goes for Remain and they lose he will be blamed as he was in 2016.

The only way he wins is if he picks the right side of the argument, and even that is not guaranteed. Ask Johnson if he feels like a winner right now. If he loses then he is sharing a shed with Cameron.

woejus

trellheim wrote: »

Boris is no fool.

Citation needed - he gunned for the job of PM, compromising all his positions in the process, got it at the worst possible time and painted himself into a corner and has no workable majority.

The next 6 weeks will be pressure upon pressure from large UK employers, D notices be damned. The opposition will force him or his agents to beg for an extension, the length of which will be determined by the EU.

All fairly foolish to the detached observer.

fash

trellheim wrote: »

Boris is no fool. RIGHT now the ground is being prepared for a high pressure WA2=NI backstop minus with no other option theres a number of twitter threads with this as focus currently. The numbers will be razor edge.

At the moment Barnier and Juncker are saying "nothing has been given to us" as they havent' been officially given anything. What I reckon has happened is they've been shown WA2 = NI backstop with some give from ROI .

My question at the mo is if we give up on backstop (and I keep on coming back to this ) the border issue cant be solved .

Personally Im of the view of sort it now or hard border it otherwise we will get shafted by UK down the line - and isnt this the line our govt has taken as well ? Interesting to watch Govt rhetoric on this as we roll toward a GE

Agreed: the Irish government/civil service was (from my perspective impressively) able to foresee that the UK plan was to agree everything else then throw a half assed border solution in the table at the last minute and pressure Ireland into agreeing it-and living with the consequences - hence including the backstop into the WA discussions. Ireland should accept nothing less- after a no deal, either the UK reasonably quickly comes back to the table (and for me reasonably quickly is 5 years or so) or the UK breaks up. A suboptimal last minute border solution is for ever - and should not be accepted under any circumstance.

ambro25

Enzokk wrote: »

Liz Truss

<...>

https://mobile.twitter.com/sarkenremainEU/status/1174070976344219649

Demonstrating as much integrity as just about every last Tory minister of the past 3 years.

The UK fully deserves its banana republic parliamentarian monarchy autocracy tag these days.

Enzokk

The Supreme Court case is hearing argument again, the Government representative is much better this morning than Lord Keen last night in his presentation at least. He sounds calm and in control and not like he isn't in control, which Lord Keen seemed to be yesterday afternoon. As GM228 noted there are a lot of arguments and valid ones that the UK government is providing. On whether the courts should intervene the argument does seem to be that it is up to parliament to act and not need for the courts.

https://twitter.com/davidallengreen/status/1174277996661944320?s=20

The question then is how does parliament act if it has very little time or it is prorogued? This is a question that is obviously on the minds of the justices as well. His answer seemed to be parliament needs to act in time before or by calling a VONC when they come back.

Akrasia

Enzokk wrote: »

The Supreme Court case is hearing argument again, the Government representative is much better this morning than Lord Keen last night in his presentation at least. He sounds calm and in control and not like he isn't in control, which Lord Keen seemed to be yesterday afternoon. As GM228 noted there are a lot of arguments and valid ones that the UK government is providing. On whether the courts should intervene the argument does seem to be that it is up to parliament to act and not need for the courts.

https://twitter.com/davidallengreen/status/1174277996661944320?s=20

The question then is how does parliament act if it has very little time or it is prorogued? This is a question that is obviously on the minds of the justices as well. His answer seemed to be parliament needs to act in time before or by calling a VONC when they come back.

So the Solution to the parliament being shut down to prevent them from stopping the horse from bolting, is to tell them that they can always shut the stable door later on when the horse is long gone.

This is why the Supreme court needs to rule against the government on this matter. If they accept the argument that the prime minister can shut down parliament on a whim and cannot be challenged by anyone except a parliament that has been shut down, it's a ludicrous state of affairs that could by abused by anyone tyrannical enough to dispose of the democratic institutions to push through their own personal agenda.