Brexit discussion thread XI (Please read OP before posting)

Joe_ Public

Enzokk wrote: »

I am not sure if this tweet were posted yesterday as the thread was moving very quickly, but to give you an idea why the EU is happy with this deal,

https://twitter.com/MarkUrban01/status/1184966246141513730?s=20

So the objective for Barnier 2 weeks ago was to get the UK to move to a NI only backstop but not convince them that this is what was happening. I am still astonished that the ERG and those Tories that opposed May's deal is thinking of backing Johnson inferior deal now.

I think if this deal passes they win the next election, on the back of Corbyn's luck finally running out and Johnson having the momentum from this "win". Then there is 5 years of consequences of this deal to be felt until the next election, with a new Labour leader and 5 more years of austerity you would think that a Blair like majority will be in the offing for Labour in 2024. But for the sake of those vulnerable families and people who will be hurt these will be 5 long and hard years ahead.

Austerity is officially over if you accept tory spin. Theyre now promising to spend as much public money as labour which i take as lies and simply a cynical attempt to steal the opposition thunder. Its line for line from the trump-bannon playbook. Doesnt matter if any of it is true long as gullible voters fall for it.

Topgear on Dave

Sammy is on BBC news now from Larne.

Its a No from Sammy.

"We did try to help the prime minister"

Christy Sweets

Enzokk wrote: »

For those people who think just getting this deal done will be the end of it, the next deadline is June next year. There will be only a few months of quiet before a decision will have to be made on whether an extension will be applied for, for the transition period. If no extension and no FTA and it is the cliff edge again of no-deal, or WTO trade. Good time ahead.

Sam Gyimah has been warning last night and today that the prospect of a crash out in January 2021 is why the ERG are willing to support this deal.

If it passes, I presume we'll see another cycle of parliamentary chaos and chicanery in an effort to stop such a crash out, with an extension to the transition period the goal?

Isn't all this just kicking the can down the road?

Could Britain end up with an endless cycle of extensions to the transition period?

And if there was a crash out in January 2021, how does that affect NI?

Is NI completely separated under this deal?

Could Britain crash out but the NI frontstop remain, or are the frontstop arrangements as regards NI cancelled too, ie., hard border?

blanch152

GM228 wrote: »

I find it pretty astonishing that no mainstream media is reporting on the case (running for a good 35 minutes now) in Scotland debating if the new WA is lawful in accordance with the Taxation (Cross-Border Trade) Act 2018.

Lord Pentland has indicated that due to the limited timeframe that the court may rule today.

I don't think that case has a hope in hell.

Government's sign deals that are illegal all the time, that is why most international treaties need implementing legislation - to change the law.

Water John

It may come down to what type of whip Lb imposes. If it, as is hinted do not expel and deselect those that vote with the Govn't, the Deal has a good chance of passing. It is a debate going on in the party today. Sturgeon has been stirring it by saying that by not imposing a full whip, it leaves Lb off the hook. Secretly letting the Deal through.

Zubeneschamali

Christy Sweets wrote: »

Could Britain end up with an endless cycle of extensions to the transition period?

FTA deals normally takes 5-10 years. If the UK puts pressure on negotiators to do it faster, they will have to accept a worse deal.

So they will either extend the transition period for a minimum of 5 years or get reamed in the FTA talks.

Don't forget that the EU have a really professional, experienced team who have been doing trade deals all around the world for decades. The UK have whoever they have managed to rope in during the last 3 years. What professional negotiator would want to work for the UK side after the last 3 years of utter incompetence on the political side?

blanch152

CelticRambler wrote: »

Bobby McDonagh, former Irish ambassador to UK & EU, was just on Sky saying that this deal takes the wind out of the United Ireland sails. Having thought overnight about the proposed four-year rolling referendum, I think that's completely wrong, and the DUP are right to be afraid.

In effect, that same vote could be used by the SoS for NI as a UI barometer. In the more-likely-than-not event that the UK suffers economically in the short to medium term, they'll be looking seriously for opportunities to cut costs, and the biggest on-going cost to the nation is the annual subsidy for NI.

If the population of NI (or at least their elected representatives) have indicated that they prefer to remain aligned with the RoI than GB - because essentially "no hard border" does equal alignment with the very tangible RoI rather than the vague and distant EU - then why would Westminster want to keep the troublesome province?

Over five years, NI will have benefited from a hefty £3.5bn of EU funds [pdf]; that's on top of the annual GB hand-out, and it's going to evaporate next year. With GB farmers and factories also losing their EU funding, there's going to be very little GB tax revenue to spread around - but just across the invisible border, the still EU-funded Irish hills will be genuinely greener when looked upon by the people of the Six Counties.

Rarely do I have any sympathy for the DUP, but on this point, I do believe they've been frog-marched into a "pre-UI referendum" by Johnson, and they would be completely insane not to vote against the bill.

It is impossible to tell at this point how this affects the long-term achievement of a United Ireland.

One interpretation is exactly as you point out and is a good possibility. However, another possibility is that Northern Ireland exploits its unique position of having access both to the UK and to the EU and experiences a glut of FDI, leaving it in the position where changing its constitutional status in any direction carries significant risks to prosperity. On the other hand, do they have the expertise to take advantage of this? If they don't have the forward-looking civil servants and politicians to exploit this position, your scenario becomes the likely one.

The main objective is the maintenance of peace. This deal does a fair job in just about maintaining the balance of peace and that is why we should be happy. How the longer-term plays out is for another day.

Imreoir2

Christy Sweets wrote: »

Sam Gyimah has been warning last night and today that the prospect of a crash out in January 2021 is why the ERG are willing to support this deal.

If it passes, I presume we'll see another cycle of parliamentary chaos and chicanery in an effort to stop such a crash out, with an extension to the transition period the goal?

Isn't all this just kicking the can down the road?

Could Britain end up with an endless cycle of extensions to the transition period?

And if there was a crash out in January 2021, how does that affect NI?

Is NI completely separated under this deal?

Could Britain crash out but the NI frontstop remain, or are the frontstop arrangements as regards NI cancelled too, ie., hard border?

Yes, that is exactly what will happen. It will be a rince and repeat of the A50 process but with less time. First there will be a general election in the UK which may or may not give us a hung parliament, followed by vague speaches about the bright future and wonder deals the new government will deliver, while the clock ticks down to WTO trading terms for GB. The political sphere then goes back into crisis over the new threeway choice between some from of realistic deal with the EU, no-deal WTO terms or extension of the transition period. Add the push for Scotish independance to this political crisis this time around.

At least NI would be safely in the EU economic sphere at that stage. The frontstop arangements are essentially permenant and would persist if the UK opts for no-deal on trade.

Enzokk

Christy Sweets wrote: »

Sam Gyimah has been warning last night and today that the prospect of a crash out in January 2021 is why the ERG are willing to support this deal.

If it passes, I presume we'll see another cycle of parliamentary chaos and chicanery in an effort to stop such a crash out, with an extension to the transition period the goal?

Isn't all this just kicking the can down the road?

Could Britain end up with an endless cycle of extensions to the transition period?

And if there was a crash out in January 2021, how does that affect NI?

Is NI completely separated under this deal?

Could Britain crash out but the NI frontstop remain, or are the frontstop arrangements as regards NI cancelled too, ie., hard border?

I could be wrong but the next crash out will not have the safety nets they have now. There is no EU membership as a landing spot if they leave so the stakes will be even higher if they pass this deal and the next deadlines approaches.

I think the below article puts it well, why are the ERG and right wing of the Tory party so happy with this deal?

Labour pro-dealers: The question is, do you trust Boris Johnson?

What is more likely? Is it 'Classic Dom' -a tactic whereby the government meant all along to sign up to LPFs but held them back until the last moment to clinch the support of the EU27 and Labour rebels? Or is Johnson's last minute switch to a legally non-binding statement a weightless object that, the moment a deal is passed, will just float off into space?

It is not possible to satisfy the demands of both right wing Brexiters and pro-deal Labour MPs on this point. Indeed, there is evidence that 90s-era Eurosceptics aren't happy with Johnson's deal. The old school eurosceptics in the Bruges Group oppose the deal and veteran Eurosceptics like Owen Paterson and Iain Duncan Smith are thought to be restive.

Someone is going to get burned. The question for Labour MPs is whose side will Johnson take once Britain is out of the EU. It's true that Dominic Cummings is no friend to the ERG. But equally, they are Tory MPs while Labour MPs are not. To assume Johnson will side with opposition MPs when push comes to shove would be quite the leap of faith.

LPF - Level Playing Field

The other criteria that Labour MPs has to take into account is if Johnson leaves the EU in 2 weeks time he will be able to tell the Brexit Party potential voters that there is only a short extension and he will not ask for another one and they will be free of the EU. He will romp home in that case and he will not have a problem of getting votes through or having acts imposed on him like the Benn act.

As for the frontstop, that stays whatever happens to the UK. That is a legal treaty and it can only be stopped by Stormont in 2024, and if the UK has crashed out and the predictions are halfway to being right then there is no sane politician in NI that will want to join the UK and the problems they will face.

The UK political system is still broken and this deal does nothing to heal it. Years of lies from the papers need to be felt before they can admit they were wrong and the true healing can begin. I just fear for the damage, unnecessary damage, that people will have to fell and experience before this realization comes to pass.

Zubeneschamali

Imreoir2 wrote: »

The political sphere then goes back into crisis over the new threeway choice between some from of realistic deal with the EU, no-deal WTO terms or extension of the transition period.

No, the FTA talks will barely have started when this choice has to be made, so it'll be extension for talks or WTO exit.

And if they choose an extension, they get the same choice 1 year later and 1 year later and 1 year later...

jimmycrackcorm

GM228 wrote: »

I find it pretty astonishing that no mainstream media is reporting on the case (running for a good 35 minutes now) in Scotland debating if the new WA is lawful in accordance with the Taxation (Cross-Border Trade) Act 2018.

Lord Pentland has indicated that due to the limited timeframe that the court may rule today.

Nothing that can't be fixed with an amendment to change the law.

Joe_ Public

Water John wrote: »

It may come down to what type of whip Lb imposes. If it, as is hinted do not expel and deselect those that vote with the Govn't, the Deal has a good chance of passing. It is a debate going on in the party today. Sturgeon has been stirring it by saying that by not imposing a full whip, it leaves Lb off the hook. Secretly letting the Deal through.

Theres no question they have to be effectively booted out if they defy whip. Absolute abandonment of every labour principle, regardless of who voted to invoke A50 or not. Anyone who votes for this deal has no real business being in labour party imo. They need to spell thst out very clearly.

LuckyLloyd

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

No, the FTA talks will barely have started when this choice has to be made, so it'll be extension for talks or WTO exit.

And if they choose an extension, they get the same choice 1 year later and 1 year later and 1 year later...

All the leverage and experience one side with Ireland not available to them as a bargaining chip anymore.

Enzokk

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

FTA deals normally takes 5-10 years. If the UK puts pressure on negotiators to do it faster, they will have to accept a worse deal.

So they will either extend the transition period for a minimum of 5 years or get reamed in the FTA talks.

Don't forget that the EU have a really professional, experienced team who have been doing trade deals all around the world for decades. The UK have whoever they have managed to rope in during the last 3 years. What professional negotiator would want to work for the UK side after the last 3 years of utter incompetence on the political side?

I saw a tweet a week or so ago on why FTA takes a long time to agree. It is not the time spent sorting out what each side wants that takes time but the legalese from these negotiations that takes the most time. So in a 7 year timeframe it would be 2 years negotiations, then having those agreements converted to legal text. Then having the legal text checked by either side and if one isn't happy than it has to be changed. Once all legal texts are ready it goes for ratification in the EU case all 27 nations and a few regional parliaments can object. If they do object then they have to go back again and find a solution, convert it to legal text again, check that all is okay and have it confirmed by the relevant parties. Once all of that is done then the agreement can be signed by the leaders and the deal can be implemented.

That is why it takes years to complete and why there cannot really be a quick solution as it just takes time to complete, especially with the EU involved. There are examples of FTA's done in 2 years, the Australia-US one springs to mind but because it was rushed there are analysis that show it could have hurt trade with closer neighbours while increasing trade further away, so a net loss for Australia.

Water John

Will it be the first time, a democratically elected parliament, voted voluntarily for a recession? What they choose I'm not overly worried about once, No Deal is off the table. Can't see how some Lb MPs think it's still around and thus thinking of voting for this Deal.

There are hints that Lb/Corbyn won't expel dissidents. That's why I raised the issue. I agree couldn't see how they wouldn't.

jmayo

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

The EU don't want to be responsible for letting the UK crash out which is why they've agreed to the extensions. When Brexit fails, it needs to be the UK's own fault, not the EU's.

Either way the British media and the Brexiters are going to blame someone else when it doesn't work out as rosey as they claimed.

Just wait until all these supposed brilliant open trade deals don't pan out.
It will all be the fault of EU for not allowing them trade.

First Up wrote: »

The EU doesn't set up customs posts.

But hasn't there been something about having EU personnel check goods coming into NI destined for ROI ?

Maybe someone can answer this?
I got part of interview with some lady I believe is related to NI trade representative body this morning on radio.
She actually answered question about how a trader in NI selling goods onto person from ROI would not have tarrifs applied to those goods.

Is there stipulation that tarrifs will apply if goods are sold on from ROI to elsewhere?

It just sounds like a fudge and possibly unworkable due to level of tracking involved.

Maybe someone can elaborate and provide some enlightenment on what exactly will transpire?

ancapailldorcha

jmayo wrote: »

Either way the British media and the Brexiters are going to blame someone else when it doesn't work out as rosey as they claimed.

Just wait until all these supposed brilliant open trade deals don't pan out.
It will all be the fault of EU for not allowing them trade.

I think the strategy of blaming everyone else has already convinced all or the vast majority of people it would be effective on. I'm struggling to see how people who are pro and anti-Brexit would change sides now unless something dramatic emerges. There's already widespread skepticism bordering on cynicism regarding the media here now (not unfounded, IMO) so it's become routine to dismiss inconvenient reports out of hand.

gooch2k9

At this point surely the DUP have to backtrack and support revoke? Two deals negotiated, both differentiating NI from the rest of UK. Brexit is only going one way for them. The best thing they can do "for the union" is to swallow their pride and change tack.

CelticRambler

blanch152 wrote: »

However, another possibility is that Northern Ireland exploits its unique position of having access both to the UK and to the EU and experiences a glut of FDI ...

Yes, it's a possibility ... but one that, at the moment, seems to be as much of a unicorn as the greater Brexit project. I have yet to see anything that indicates that NI will enjoy more advantageous access to the GB market than any EU country. This deal adds two levels of extra bureaucracy to internal (UK) market trade - customs declarations and VAT declarations - for no demonstrable benefit whatsoever.

Even if there was a functioning government in NI, I can't see how it could sell the region as a better place to do business than either a pure GB or a pure EU location. Keeping the land border "invisible" is great for the RoI, for ordinary cross-border daily life and very good for NI farmers (compared to a hard border), but that's about the extent of it. All the wonderful new FTAs that the UK is going to get are
(a) probably going to be no better than those that the EU has already agreed with the same countries;
(b) based overwhelmingly on what's good for London/GB, not NI; and
(c) not signed until long after NI has lost all of its EU subventions and been locked out of the EU agencies that generate so much of the added value that influences FDI decisions.

Shelga

So the only difference with this deal, as far as I can see, is that the backstop is now permanent (although having given Stormont the illusion of power over it), and we no longer call it the backstop? Is that accurate?

Also what happens if Stormont is still not sitting when the first vote on maintaining the not-a-backstop is due?

Why some people in RoI enthusiastically embrace the idea of worsening our own standard of living to take on this basket case of a region, is beyond me.

Water John

Parliament will open at 9.30 am. Looks like it will go on for a good bit of the day, with amendments. Remember Bercow always likes to allow all MPs to have their say. He won't cut it short.

Christy42

Shelga wrote: »

So the only difference with this deal, as far as I can see, is that the backstop is now permanent (although having given Stormont the illusion of power over it), and we no longer call it the backstop? Is that accurate?

Also what happens if Stormont is still not sitting when the first vote on maintaining the not-a-backstop is due?

Why some people in RoI enthusiastically embrace the idea of worsening our own standard of living to take on this basket case of a region, is beyond me.

I reckon Stormont will have to overturn it so that if it was not sitting the status quo would remain. This gives Sinn Fein an effective veto as they can stop Stormont from running again if they feel the DUP will get rid of the backstop.

Yeah. It is largely just not calling a backstop the backstop which seems to be the key to getting the ERG on board.

farmchoice

Christy42 wrote: »

I reckon Stormont will have to overturn it so that if it was not sitting the status quo would remain. This gives Sinn Fein an effective veto as they can stop Stormont from running again if they feel the DUP will get rid of the backstop.

Yeah. It is largely just not calling a backstop the backstop which seems to be the key to getting the ERG on board.

we are now to call it the northern Irish protocol.

robinph

BBC News wrote:

Court of Appeal judges have rejected a bid by civil rights campaigners for an urgent hearing of their case against Prime Minister Boris Johnson over Brexit.

The group, Liberty, brought the case in an attempt to ensure the government complied with the Benn Act - the law passed by MPs last month preventing a no-deal Brexit on 31 October.

Lord Burnett says the judges will give full reasons for their decision in writing at a later date.

Is this the case about if the new deal with the renamed backstop is legal or not... or is it the case about if Johnsono has to send a letter or if the court will send the letter?

gooch2k9

Christy42 wrote: »

I reckon Stormont will have to overturn it so that if it was not sitting the status quo would remain. This gives Sinn Fein an effective veto as they can stop Stormont from running again if they feel the DUP will get rid of the backstop.

Yeah. It is largely just not calling a backstop the backstop which seems to be the key to getting the ERG on board.

In the case of this vote the UK government will convene all MLAs and a majority of ones present win the vote. Regardless of whether Stormont is collapsed or not. Nobody has a veto, which is how it should be.

CarPark2

Shelga wrote: »

Why some people in RoI enthusiastically embrace the idea of worsening our own standard of living to take on this basket case of a region, is beyond me.

Exactly my thoughts.
Reunification would destroy our economy for years.
Instead of London having to deal with almost half the population that do not view themselves as British, we would have to deal with half the population that do not view themselves as Irish.
After 20 years of no killing, there seems to have been almost no reconciliation between both sides. They seem as far away from each other now as they were 20 years ago.

CarPark2

Shelga wrote: »

Also what happens if Stormont is still not sitting when the first vote on maintaining the not-a-backstop is due?

Apparently they will call together all MLAs that are elected at the time. Whichever ones turn up will have a vote.

See /12 here: https://twitter.com/tconnellyRTE/status/1184870424582209537

FrancieBrady

Christy42 wrote: »

I reckon Stormont will have to overturn it so that if it was not sitting the status quo would remain. This gives Sinn Fein an effective veto as they can stop Stormont from running again if they feel the DUP will get rid of the backstop.

Totally wrong. That eventuality has been covered.

Yeah. It is largely just not calling a backstop the backstop which seems to be the key to getting the ERG on board.

From an all island perspective it is IMO a wonderful piece of maneouvering as it takes away any prospect of hiding behind doublespeak or outside influence or power.

For a Hard Border to now appear on this island, a political party will have to front up and campaign/vote for it.

Brilliant in every way.

storker

Will the Frontstop be called "pro-democratic" now that Boris agrees with it?

humberklog

I was listening to Andrew Bridgen (Con. MP, Nth. Lcst. Little Englander, Farage Mole) on the BBC this morning espousing the great bright future for GB.
He was talking up being master of their domain and now how they'll be able to compete with ireland re taxation and how he can't wait for the likes of FB, Amazon etc. to leave Ireland in their droves for the green and pleasant land of Blighty.

Neighbourly sort of fella.