Brexit discussion thread X (Please read OP before posting)

bobmalooka

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

Those words will come back to haunt him.

The opposition will taunt him with it and hold it up as the reason why he must be stopped.

ThePanjandrum

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

The Brexit party won't stand by anyone with 5% and your average English Tory voter doesn't give a damn about the DUP and Northern Ireland.

The 5% is because voters think that Boris is adopting Brexit Party views, if it becomes clear that he isn't the support will be withdrawn

Mr.Nice Guy

Macron will likely be firm tomorrow but I suspect the UK media will dismiss it as a 'good cop, bad cop' tactic by both Merkel and him.

Professor Moriarty wrote:

Johnson made a serious gaffe today which isn't getting much publicity. In his bluff and bluster, having heard Merkel, he said that the onus was on Britain to come up with a solution to the backstop.

I don't consider that a gaffe because Johnson's argument is that the solution is easily found but that the previous government - 'the collaborators' - weren't serious enough to push them. It's irrelevant as far as they're concerned that this trusted trader nonsense won't work. All they want is to go back to their electorate and tell them that they offered a perfectly worKable solution but the intransigent bullies in Brussels would not be reasonable. They will be ably assisted by the likes of the Telegraph in pushing this narrative. They will also keep insisting as Johnson did today that they won't put up infrastructure, thus shifting the blame for checks on to the EU.

Professor Moriarty

ThePanjandrum wrote: »

The 5% is because voters think that Boris is adopting Brexit Party views, if it becomes clear that he isn't the support will be withdrawn

It would be great if the Brexit party ate into the Tory vote. Both parties on 20% each would be an excellent outcome.

fash

ThePanjandrum wrote: »

The Brexit Party will stand by Nothern Ireland and Boris knows that if he crosses the Party, he is faced with a General Election where he will lose many seats.

The Will of the People of Northern Ireland was to remain and the Will of the People is to have a back stop. Are you saying that the Brexit party supports the democratic will of the People of Northern Ireland now? It seems I underestimated and have been shamefully uncharitable as regards their commitment to democracy, integrity, morality and principle.

Joe_ Public

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

Those words will come back to haunt him.

You would definitely hope so. It also appears to suggest that Johnson now accepts that the idea of binning the backstop is a non runner, as in it cant be one of the possible solutions. Ball very definitely in his court now. Interesting days ahead.

ThePanjandrum

BonnieSituation wrote: »

And those not holding Irish or UK citizenship? How do you stop them?

Internal checks in the UK in the same way as at present. Obviously it needs improving but we have a lot of illegal immigration anyway. It can be as simple as not leaving when your visa expires.

bobmalooka

ThePanjandrum wrote: »

The 5% is because voters think that Boris is adopting Brexit Party views, if it becomes clear that he isn't the support will be withdrawn

Which will be good news for those favoring a softer/no brexit as a surge for BP will cannibalize the leave vote

fash

ThePanjandrum wrote: »

It seems like a very racist policy from the EU.

I'm sure you'll agree that it is rather rich for a brexiter to be complaining about "racism" of someone else - something similar to Hitler complaining about shocking levels of anti-Semitism.

Spanish Eyes

Strazdas wrote: »

Someone on the BBC News channel earlier said Johnson made a blunder and went off script. He clearly wasn't supposed to admit anything of the sort.

But, but..... I thought he was oh so intelligent and educated and all that.

FWIW I also think he may have lost the run of himself. But it could also have been tactical.

EU made demands, we could not comply within the time frame. EU is intransigent, they are bullying us. Can't you see it?

Don't forget Cummings in all this. He was probably talking Johnson through this with an invisible bluetooth earpiece.

Sorry, I am so mad at all this theatre. Get a solution please.

Professor Moriarty

Mr.Nice Guy wrote: »

Macron will likely be firm tomorrow but I suspect the UK media will dismiss it as a 'good cop, bad cop' tactic by both Merkel and him.



I don't consider that a gaffe because Johnson's argument is that the solution is easily found but that the previous government - 'the collaborators' - weren't serious enough to push them. It's irrelevant as far as they're concerned that this trusted trader nonsense won't work. All they want is to go back to their electorate and tell them that they offered a perfectly worKable solution but the intransigent bullies in Brussels would not be reasonable. They will be ably assisted by the likes of the Telegraph in pushing this narrative. They will also keep insisting as Johnson did today that they won't put up infrastructure, thus shifting the blame for checks on to the EU.

It's a gaffe because MPs of all shades, including Tory, will ask why he hasn't sorted out the backstop. Similarly, in any discussions with the EU, the EU will simply fold their arms, reject his boder proposals unicorns, and remind him that the onus is on him to come up with satisfactory solutions.

prawnsambo

ThePanjandrum wrote: »

The 5% is because voters think that Boris is adopting Brexit Party views, if it becomes clear that he isn't the support will be withdrawn

You do know that it's what he's been aiming for? Even Farage knows that's what he's doing and is looking for a pact where he (Farage) can go after Labour leave seats.

Mr.Nice Guy

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

It's a gaffe because MPs of all shades, including Tory, will ask why he hasn't sorted out the backstop. Similarly, in any discussions with the EU, the EU will simply fold their arms, reject his boder proposals unicorns, and remind him that the onus is on him to come up with satisfactory solutions.

And he will simply reply that he has sorted it but the EU wouldn't enter into a spirit of cooperation necessary to make it work.

His objective is not to find a solution. It is merely to make it look like he has found a solution.

maynooth_rules

The telegraph should be fun tomorrow. No doubt their reading of today is thag Merkel has got a Ireland ready to throw under the bus

ilovesmybrick

ThePanjandrum wrote: »

It seems like a very racist policy from the EU.

It's not a racist policy in the slightest. In this individuals case he is working in a high level organisation disctributing EU funds. For fairly obvious reasons it is important that those individuals are EU citizens, so to put it bluntly, if there's no deal they cannot have individuals that were formerly EU citizens in charge of multi-million Euro financial areas. This is a consequence of leaving these organisations.

To put it bluntly, would you accept a Finnish/Spanish/French/German in charge of your finances in the UK? Because the entire reason behind the Brexit vote was saying that no non-British person should have a say in their finances or legislation.

Kermit.de.frog

This is in the main article in the Telegraph.

Angela Merkel suggested she would be willing to ditch the controversial backstop if the UK can agree a suitable alternative by Sept 20.

No she did not.

briany

Joe_ Public wrote: »

My prediction is they'll come back in 30 days with a rehash of all that half-baked stuff that came out of the alternative arrangements commission - trusted trader, electronic forms, checks away from border, a few more bells and whistles - and say taa daaa, here you go, problem solved. And when EU shake their heads and say there's absolutely nothing new here, they'll get cross, stamp their feet and complain they're being unreasonable and just not interested in looking for solutions in the first place.

What, exactly, IS wrong with TT schemes, checks away from the border, electronic forms etc, again? I think that these things need to be definitively refuted as solutions, if they're not workable, so that if and when the UK proposes them again, they can't just stomp off back to their populous, and claim EU intransigence and bad faith without at least being categorically reminded why this is untrue.

A Dub in Glasgo

The Brexiters are already twittering that this is a masterstroke from Johnson with Merkels help. They claim it has essentially neutered parliament for 30 days and allows the clock to run out

ThePanjandrum

fash wrote: »

I'm sure you'll agree that it is rather rich for a brexiter to be complaining about "racism" of someone else - something similar to Hitler complaining about shocking levels of anti-Semitism.

Not at all, have you seen how many candidates from the minority ethnic groups in the UK the Brexit Party has. I imagine its at least in line with the percentage the Irish Parties have and well in advance of the EU as a whole.

If you want to throw accusations of Naziism around, you'll have great difficulty in finding a British Prime Minister who supported him, let alone visiting the minister at the German legation to express their condolences at Hitler's death.

prawnsambo

Spanish Eyes wrote: »

But, but..... I thought he was oh so intelligent and educated and all that.

FWIW I also think he may have lost the run of himself. But it could also have been tactical.

EU made demands, we could not comply within the time frame. EU is intransigent, they are bullying us. Can't you see it?

Don't forget Cummings in all this. He was probably talking Johnson through this with an invisible bluetooth earpiece.

Sorry, I am so mad at all this theatre. Get a solution please.

Like this?


I actually think he did get the wrong end of the stick with what Merkel said. And this seems to be news to him and most of the press. The future relationship has the capacity to eliminate the need for a backstop. And that can be decided even in basic form at any time. Hence the 30 days.

BonnieSituation

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

Those words will come back to haunt him.

His first trip abroad as PM off to a cracking start. No wonder he was kept locked up in No. 10 the last few weeks.

Professor Moriarty

Mr.Nice Guy wrote: »

And he will simply reply that he has sorted it but the EU wouldn't enter into a spirit of cooperation necessary to make it work.

His objective is not to find a solution. It is merely to make it look like he has found a solution.

I know that's his intention. But he left an unintended hostage to fortune behind today that will be used domestically and by the EU. Unless Britain crashes out, the onus is now on Britain to find a solution. That's a stupid red line to give away.

ThePanjandrum

prawnsambo wrote: »

You do know that it's what he's been aiming for? Even Farage knows that's what he's doing and is looking for a pact where he (Farage) can go after Labour leave seats.

Farage is also aiming at the Tory Remainers who are trying to ignore the Referendum and the Speaker of the House.

Professor Moriarty

BonnieSituation wrote: »

His first trip abroad as PM off to a cracking start. No wonder he was kept locked up in No. 10 the last few weeks.

Imagine what he'll be like after a robust exchange with Macron.

BonnieSituation

ThePanjandrum wrote: »

Internal checks in the UK in the same way as at present. Obviously it needs improving but we have a lot of illegal immigration anyway. It can be as simple as not leaving when your visa expires.

The same as Windrush? Oh wait they weren't illegals...

ThePanjandrum

ilovesmybrick wrote: »

It's not a racist policy in the slightest. In this individuals case he is working in a high level organisation disctributing EU funds. For fairly obvious reasons it is important that those individuals are EU citizens, so to put it bluntly, if there's no deal they cannot have individuals that were formerly EU citizens in charge of multi-million Euro financial areas. This is a consequence of leaving these organisations.

To put it bluntly, would you accept a Finnish/Spanish/French/German in charge of your finances in the UK? Because the entire reason behind the Brexit vote was saying that no non-British person should have a say in their finances or legislation.

We have a Canadian in charge of the Bank of England. What's wrong with having non-nationals working in spending departments? I think that it's racist if you say that, for example, someone cannot work in the Treasury because they are an Indian national. Why do you think that they should be banned if they are the best person for the job?

Bit cynical

prawnsambo wrote: »

I actually think he did get the wrong end of the stick with what Merkel said. And this seems to be news to him and most of the press. The future relationship has the capacity to eliminate the need for a backstop. And that can be decided even in basic form at any time. Hence the 30 days.

I doubt if anything can ever be agreed that will beat the backstop as an insurance policy. It is perfect from the EU perspective.

ThePanjandrum

BonnieSituation wrote: »

The same as Windrush? Oh wait they weren't illegals...

And they didn't have visas when they came. The British population and politicians said that the Home Office had been mistaken in its actions, weven though many of these people had not acted to regularise their situation, despite reminders.

bobmalooka

ThePanjandrum wrote: »

Not at all, have you seen how many candidates from the minority ethnic groups in the UK the Brexit Party has. I imagine its at least in line with the percentage the Irish Parties have and well in advance of the EU as a whole.

If you want to throw accusations of Naziism around, you'll have great difficulty in finding a British Prime Minister who supported him, let alone visiting the minister at the German legation to express their condolences at Hitler's death.

True, closest thing I could find was your current queen throwing a few right arm salutes.

This is a fun off topic game

Podge_irl

Bit cynical wrote: »

I doubt if anything can ever be agreed that will beat the backstop as an insurance policy. It is perfect from the EU perspective.

The EU neither like nor want the backstop as it in fact gives the UK access to the single market without signing up to all 4 pillars. They have no desire for it to come into effect nor for the UK to stay in it for any longer than is necessary. They are not trying to "trap" the UK and it is difficult to fathom why that is such a hard concept for people to grasp.

Also the backstop is the insurance policy for the FTA negotiations. No one is looking to replace it with a different insurance policy - the whole point is that the FTA should supersede it.