Brexit discussion thread XI (Please read OP before posting)

CelticRambler

Someone commented earlier on this thread that there's a suspicious smugness about all these Conservatives saying Boris will comply with the law, and we will leave on the 31st.

I'm beginning to feel the same way. Despite their proven talent for believing in alternate realities, they all demonstrate this unjustifiable assurance so I've been wondering: Johnson goes to the summit on the 17th, comes back with nothing because he doesn't try very hard, writes a letter "Dear Brussels, please give me an extension" on the 19th, and then ... ... ... what? Even if he's promised not to frustrate efforts to have the EU grant an extension, he can't be put under any obligation to sincerely pursue one. Back home, he can spin any further discussions with the EU as "meaningful" to stave off a VoNC while all the time sitting on his hands in Brussels.

The only way around this that I can see, would be for the Rebel Alliance to time a VoNC for just before he gets HMQ to prorogue Parliament again and get their caretaker cabinet in place before Halloween.

Stop moaning ffs

trellheim wrote: »

yeesh where you gonna get a majority ... One Nation tory rebels might but since yer man whatshisface Philip Lee went off to the Lib Dems Boris does not have a majority ... Also the Headbangers in the ERG would not vote for it so the only debate is if you could get any of the opposition parties to abstain , and then if so would that stand to Corbyn if he did so

(vote counting in other words )

I’m looking at it the other way. He’s running down the clock to throw the WA with an NI only backstop on the table and hoping HoC will go for it as it’s betger than no deal.
Idealistic on my part maybe, in hoping that he’ll be sensible

trellheim

He is proroguing tomorrow right ? I just cant see it with a lame-duck parliament and an almost definite GE either way , so why have a QS at all ? Better to wait till after GE and then do QS with a clear mandate (assuming one is won, of course ) it screams shenanigans

fash

CelticRambler wrote: »

Someone commented earlier on this thread that there's a suspicious smugness about all these Conservatives saying Boris will comply with the law, and we will leave on the 31st.

I'm beginning to feel the same way. Despite their proven talent for believing in alternate realities, they all demonstrate this unjustifiable assurance so I've been wondering: Johnson goes to the summit on the 17th, comes back with nothing because he doesn't try very hard, writes a letter "Dear Brussels, please give me an extension" on the 19th, and then ... ... ... what? Even if he's promised not to frustrate efforts to have the EU grant an extension, he can't be put under any obligation to sincerely pursue one. Back home, he can spin any further discussions with the EU as "meaningful" to stave off a VoNC while all the time sitting on his hands in Brussels.

The only way around this that I can see, would be for the Rebel Alliance to time a VoNC for just before he gets HMQ to prorogue Parliament again and get their caretaker cabinet in place before Halloween.

The letter he is obliged to hand in if already written and included in the act. The act says: "IF NO DEAL BY 17 THEN SUBMIT "LETTER"" "LETTER" = ...."
It's not possible to legally get around it. The best way around would be to bribe an EU country to veto extension, however the bribe would need to be pretty big and certain to deal with the reputational damage in the EU- maybe give Gibraltar back to Spain or NI back to Ireland (but it would need to be legally binding of course since one couldn't trust UK)?

Water John

Won't look good if he simply uses QS as an election platform. The UK take seriously the protocol of not dragging the Queen into politics.
Johnson has other problems, in that he must reply to London Assembly Committee by Tuesday.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/oct/06/boris-johnson-jennifer-arcuri-london-assembly-summons

threeball

It's possible the Queen refuses him this time. She did investigate the procedure for removing a PM after the last time.

Also if he refuses to submit the letter of extension the courts will do it instead. The bigger question is whether the EU will grant one given his shenanigans

Torsevt

They will grant the extension

Outside of all the talk and noise the hope is that Britain has another referendum and remains

Stop moaning ffs

Well there is this. She could refuse.

https://twitter.com/nicktolhurst/status/1180447076062117888?s=21

Capt'n Midnight

fash wrote: »

Much of the growth in EU (& other) countries is simply down to the increase in head count. These extra people (or Consumers) generate growth from nothing.

UK population growth is 0.6% a year

Inflation is 2%.

So the economy should be getting 2.6% bigger just to stand still ?

And remember UK stats are in sterling.

Measure GDP in dollars or euros and it looks very different.


Here's what could happen if you have foreign debts. Though if the UK ditches the European courts too like May wanted they may not have recourse to them.
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-49918910

Around half a million indebted Polish homeowners have won their fight to be freed from crippling Swiss franc mortgages.

The Swiss currency has doubled in value since 2008, sending mortgage-holders' debts soaring.

Now, the European Court of Justice (ECJ) has ruled that they can ask Poland's courts to let them convert their loans into the Polish zloty.

CelticRambler

fash wrote: »

The letter he is obliged to hand in if already written and included in the act. The act says: "IF NO DEAL BY 17 THEN SUBMIT "LETTER"" "LETTER" = ...."
It's not possible to legally get around it.

I appreciate that, but as I said, he can comply with the law by delivering the letter (and just the one, not a second one saying "ignore that first message") - but the EU have to be convinced that there's a good reason for it, and for the time being, they are legally obliged to negotiate with Johnson & Co., not the Rebel Alliance or anyone else.

So all the time Johnson occupies 10 Downing Street, he can send nonsensical efforts to Brussels, proclaim that there's still time to get a great deal, Brussels always caves at the last minute, blah, blah, etc, etc, reassure the HoC that he's putting lots of oomph into it, stall the VoNC until 31st Oct and do everything possible to show the EU that the UK will waste a future extension in the same way as they wasted the last one.

Nothing would suit Johnson better than having the EU as a whole refuse to grant an extension. He might even be able to spin it somehow to say everyone had the knives out for poor old Hungary when it was Old Europe that pulled the plug ...

Water John

The Queen would have to take into account that Johnson has already said, it's a dead Parliament and other words to that effect. So she's entitled to ask, why she'd be making a legislative speech?

BTW, I think Johnson needs to give the EU a credible reason for asking for an Ext. He probably will omit that part.

Capt'n Midnight

fash wrote: »

Boris is parroting this line that EU membership is costing a billion pounds per day or is it per week I’m not sure. My brain obviously didn’t absorb it.
Just sounds completely spurious anyway.
But that is the only benefit he currently seems to be pushing anyway.

EU membership is costing a Billion a Month.

So only marginally more expensive than NI which is costing £9Bn a year + £1 Bn bribe.


Oh and the Billion a month to the EU doesn't include the money they get back.
NI actually costs a lot more than EU membership and is only justifiable to keep Scottish oil and gas Scotland.

The Economic cost of Brexit is £40Bn a year, so far and a no deal Brexit will mean borrowing £30Bn extra next year.


BTW Since then the Tories have promised a further £50Bn from the magic money tree in a sound bite budget that's completely meaningless as they can't deliver and don't have to even if they could because it'll be a new parliament*.

* Unless Boris repeats May's shenanigans and further extends the longest session since the Civil War.

Capt'n Midnight

CelticRambler wrote: »

I appreciate that, but as I said, he can comply with the law by delivering the letter (and just the one, not a second one saying "ignore that first message") - but the EU have to be convinced that there's a good reason for it, and for the time being, they are legally obliged to negotiate with Johnson & Co., not the Rebel Alliance or anyone else.

Parliament is sovereign. The EU is lawful. The UK constitution has oodles of loopholes.

I'm not sure what would happen. Or rather in which order.
Boris up in court again. Parliament voting on a third letter. etc.


Boris proroguing just before sending the second letter would have the EU granting the extension until there's confirmation from Parliament (which IS sovereign) about the second letter.

Capt'n Midnight

Water John wrote: »

BTW, I think Johnson needs to give the EU a credible reason for asking for an Ext. He probably will omit that part.

It's Parliament that decides whether to accept any extension offered, not Boris & Co.
So the question can be put in the answer.

The EU could say "we'll give you X months once you tell us if it's for election / referendum / request a deal that doesn't cross EU red lines/ whatever."

Junkyard Tom

threeball wrote: »

Because they're terrified that Scotland will then want the same deal, eventually leading to independence and loss of oil and gas fields as well as most of the UKs fishing waters. I think this is the likely outcome in any case.

It's bigger than oil and fish. There'd be two competing political entities in Britain for the first time in hundreds of years. Greater England's all-island integrity would be gone, in geopolitical terms that would be a disaster.

Stop moaning ffs

It’s funny the fishing is even brought up. It’s less than 1% of the U.K. economy and all the fishing rights of the entire country owned by 5 or 6 people

c.p.w.g.w

An Ciarraioch wrote: »

ITV saying that the shortage of EU-based seasonal migrants is affecting British fruit harvests, and there aren't enough non-EU workers arriving to make up the shortfall:

https://www.itv.com/news/2019-10-04/tonnes-of-british-grown-fruit-wasted-over-shortages-of-eu-workers-amid-no-deal-brexit-fears/

Should get all those unemployed british nationalist to work for the same pay as the migrants, see of they really want those jobs

threeball

Junkyard Tom wrote: »

threeball wrote: »

Because they're terrified that Scotland will then want the same deal, eventually leading to independence and loss of oil and gas fields as well as most of the UKs fishing waters. I think this is the likely outcome in any case.

It's bigger than oil and fish. There'd be two competing political entities in Britain for the first time in hundreds of years. Greater England's all-island integrity would be gone, in geopolitical terms that would be a disaster.

Yes I agree and Scotland would attempt to cut in to the Irish pie of being an English speaking country that adopted the euro. That is possibly a bigger threat to us than brexit.

Stop moaning ffs

threeball wrote: »

Yes I agree and Scotland would attempt to cut in to the Irish pie of being an English speaking country that adopted the euro. That is possibly a bigger threat to us than brexit.

You’re right on that aspect but I still support Scottish independence all the way. It’s the only way forward for them to come into the real world and truly develop and its much needed and deserved.

threeball

Stop moaning ffs wrote: »

It’s funny the fishing is even brought up. It’s less than 1% of the U.K. economy and all the fishing rights of the entire country owned by 5 or 6 people

Small but it would be eradicated if Scotland left and no country likes to lose resources no matter how small they may be.

Stop moaning ffs

threeball wrote: »

Small but it would be eradicated if Scotland left and no country likes to lose resources no matter how small they may be.

It’s less than 1% of the economy. (0.6% as far as I know?)

How is it even an issue?

A Shropshire Lad

Stop moaning ffs wrote: »

You’re right on that aspect but I still support Scottish independence all the way. It’s the only way forward for them to come into the real world and truly develop and its much needed and deserved.

I dont see the Scots going for independence when push comes to shove. There are too many Unionists in Scotland, and Unionism is entrenched in the Scottish psyche.

jm08

threeball wrote: »

Small but it would be eradicated if Scotland left and no country likes to lose resources no matter how small they may be.

Being able to fish in Scottish waters would be attractive to EU fishermen.

Fr Tod Umptious

threeball wrote: »

Yes I agree and Scotland would attempt to cut in to the Irish pie of being an English speaking country that adopted the euro. That is possibly a bigger threat to us than brexit.

Been saying that for years.
They could really challenge Ireland for FDI if they were independent, in Europe and using the Euro.

It's not in Ireland best economic interest to see an independent Scotland.

Capt'n Midnight

threeball wrote: »

Small but it would be eradicated if Scotland left and no country likes to lose resources no matter how small they may be.

We have been competing with them for inward investment all the time so no change there. Similar time and transport costs to the EU as here.

Scotland would be a like minded ally on most EU issues which could be more important to both of us.


Scotland could inherit some or all of the UK's pre-existing opt outs. At independence something like 92% of our exports went to the UK so we pegged our currency to sterling for half a century. Scotland could do the same.

I still think a Norway deal would give most of the benefits of EU membership for now.

Capt'n Midnight

jm08 wrote: »

Being able to fish in Scottish waters would be attractive to EU fishermen.

It was attractive to the Faroese.

So the UK gave them the right to fish in Scottish waters. But didn't get the rights for Scottish fishermen to fish off the Faroe Islands.

Which makes Scottish Conservative MPs an endangered species.

So Boris has to win 10 extra seats to compensate for them
and another 10 to get the DUP off his back.

Stop moaning ffs

A Shropshire Lad wrote: »

I dont see the Scots going for independence when push comes to shove. There are too many Unionists in Scotland, and Unionism is entrenched in the Scottish psyche.

200,000 at that independence march yesterday and Tories have thrown in the towel in Scotland completely. It’s a certainty at this stage.

Kermit.de.frog

Barclay trying to make it out as if the BIG problem is the consent mechanism in Britain's proposals - they say they are open to "tweaks"

Quite clever but hardly going to fool anyone.

fash

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

Barclay trying to make it out as if the BIG problem is the consent mechanism in Britain's proposals - they say they are open to "tweaks"

Quite clever but hardly going to fool anyone.

Sounds like a blame game angle: "look at the evil EU/Irish with their undemocratic demands as regards our fair and reasonable proposal".

briany

What's happening with the Benn act? I thought there was a move on to push forward the date of the extension request to yesterday?