Brexit discussion thread XII (Please read OP before posting)

Bit cynical

Christy42 wrote: »

Remember that they said they would definitely leave in May. Then Boris said that no matter what he would leave in October. This definitely leaving at "x" date has been done before and the EU won't buy it.

The vote to ban extensions is meaningless. They have also voted to outlaw a no deal on a few occasions which was also pointless. It is why they pass so easily as no one cares enough about pointless postering.

I could see Boris grabbing the EUs worst deal to get out of the room though. He will be seen as the man who delivered Brexit. It is largely irrelevant if it is good for the UK since he does not care.

Different parliamentary makeup now though. Back in October Johnson was forced by parliament to request an extension and, once granted, he could not leave. He is not under such constraints now.

However it is still possible that if, for example, the EU were to request an extension in good enough time and with good enough reasons, that legislation could be reversed and an extension granted.

First Up

serfboard wrote:

Given his track record, you'd have to wonder if, after January 31st, Johnson pivots to a BRINO, while still being able to logically say that he had "got Brexit done".

Which is exactly what he'll do.

Professor Moriarty

First Up wrote: »

Which is exactly what he'll do.

Really? You think Johnson will agree to a CU and the SM next year?

Bit cynical

First Up wrote: »

Which is exactly what he'll do.

True. During the transition period not much will change.

ancapailldorcha

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

Really? You think Johnson will agree to a CU and the SM next year?

He has a history of caving and presenting it as some sort of triumph. He does this and people actually believe him.

What's interesting this time is how, if he is even able to get the press to swallow this. If he is, he might be able to wave Farage & Co. aside. Then again, maybe people will just lap it up as Brexit being "done".

Zubeneschamali

brickster69 wrote: »

It is not me saying that. Both sides have agreed to work together in that time frame.

That doesn't mean the talks will mean a completed trade deal in that time frame.

In fact, I doubt you can point to a single commentator with experience of trade talks who thinks that will happen.

The only way I can imagine it being possible is if Johnson folds and gives away the family silver to the EU side.

Professor Moriarty

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

He has a history of caving and presenting it as some sort of triumph. He does this and people actually believe him.

What's interesting this time is how, if he is even able to get the press to swallow this. If he is, he might be able to wave Farage & Co. aside. Then again, maybe people will just lap it up as Brexit being "done".

TBH I can't see that happening at all. Hope I'm completely wrong though, and he turns out to be a One Nation, soft Brexiteer. Just can't see it.

ancapailldorcha

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

TBH I can't see that happening at all. Hope I'm completely wrong though, and he turns out to be a One Nation, soft Brexiteer. Just can't see it.

I mean, you know.... Last Thursday means I'm not exactly going to die on the hill over my reading of the UK's political landscape. I'm just thinking that this is posturing for his base.

But if I'm wrong, I'm getting mentally closer to being ready to just jump ship. I've already ditched a potential career change so now I'm just waiting to see what things will look like long term.

Bit cynical

I think with the upcoming trade negotiations, Johnson will present an offer to the EU fairly early on. Then there will be mutterings from the EU side and then there won't be too much news coming out for a while as talks get under way. Neither Johnson, nor the EU will give much away about how things are going for the early months.

LuckyLloyd

Bit cynical wrote: »

I think with the upcoming trade negotiations, Johnson will present an offer to the EU fairly early on. Then there will be mutterings from the EU side and then there won't be too much news coming out for a while as talks get under way. Neither Johnson, nor the EU will give much away about how things are going for the early months.

So you think the UK have leverage with the front stop confirmed as an International Treaty in law? Interesting - I completely disagree.

Zubeneschamali

Bit cynical wrote: »

However it is still possible that if, for example, the EU were to request an extension in good enough time and with good enough reasons, that legislation could be reversed and an extension granted.

Hmm, it wouldn't cost the EU anything to ask for an extension, and it would let Johnson peacock about in the UK being gracious and allowing the bumbling unelected EU bureaucrats more time to finish their homework, the slackers.

It might work!

Chips Lovell

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

Really? You think Johnson will agree to a CU and the SM next year?

Not explicitly. He'll agree to an extension. And then another. And then another. Eventually, when it's dragged on long enough and enough heat has been drained from the issue he, or more likely one of his successors, will agree to normalise the situation by formally remaining in the Single Market and Customs Union or even opt to rejoin the EU.

Leaving on WTO terms is foolish and he knows this.

Professor Moriarty

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

I mean, you know.... Last Thursday means I'm not exactly going to die on the hill over my reading of the UK's political landscape. I'm just thinking that this is posturing for his base.

But if I'm wrong, I'm getting mentally closer to being ready to just jump ship. I've already ditched a potential career change so now I'm just waiting to see what things will look like long term.

You'll know by July.

Professor Moriarty

Chips Lovell wrote: »

Not explicitly. He'll agree to an extension. And then another. And then another. Eventually, when it's dragged on long enough and enough heat has been drained from the issue he, or more likely one of his successors, will agree to normalise the situation by formally remaining in the Single Market and Customs Union or even opt to rejoin the EU.

Leaving on WTO terms is foolish and he knows this.

But isn't he introducing legislation that makes it illegal for him to ask for an extension? Or am I missing something?

Zubeneschamali

Bit cynical wrote: »

I think with the upcoming trade negotiations, Johnson will present an offer to the EU fairly early on.

There is zero chance that Johnson will produce a workable offer - he has no clue what he even wants. He will clown around until the deadline and then take the last thing offered by the EU, just like last time.

ancapailldorcha

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

You'll know by July.

Aye. That really is the last threshold. No extension means hard Brexit. I think that's it.

Leonard Hofstadter

Bit cynical wrote: »

Neither Johnson, nor the EU will give much away about how things are going for the early months.

That hasn't been the EU's modus operandi thus far. I'd imagine the EU will tell us everything, except for when things get to the 'tunnel' phase.

The EU will walk all over the UK in this. Now that we have the frontstop instead of the backstop, the UK can't even use the border as a 'threat' to the EU to get what they want, so there is even less leverage than there was before.

It really is up to the UK to decide what they want, the more they want from the EU the more they will have to follow the EU's rules (except without any influence in said rules). In fact, given how obstructive the UK has been when it's been in the EU, getting them to follow EU rules but not being able to have a say in them is probably exactly where the EU wants them, we and all the other EU countries get all the benefits but none of the drawbacks of the UK being in the EU come to think of it.

Bit cynical

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

He has a history of caving and presenting it as some sort of triumph. He does this and people actually believe him.

Well in fairness both sides presented it as triumph.

We conceded on the UK wide backstop which would have removed two borders, one on the island and the other down the Irish sea. But we could still present this (justifiably to an extent) because there was still at least some protection against a border with NI and it was at least better than no agreement which would have resulted in the hardest of hard borders from day one.

Johnson could present it as a victory (also justifiably) because it meant that the UK mainland would not be part of a customs arrangement with the EU and subject to EU rules. This was what the ERG were objecting to. That NI would still be part of said rules was not a major issue for the ERG or most people in the UK outside of DUP voters.

ancapailldorcha

Bit cynical wrote: »

Well in fairness both sides presented it as triumph.

We conceded on the UK wide backstop which would have removed two borders, one on the island and the other down the Irish sea. But we could still present this (justifiably to an extent) because there was still at least some protection against a border with NI and it was at least better than no agreement which would have resulted in the hardest of hard borders.

Johnson could present it as a victory (also justifiably) because it meant that the UK mainland would not be part of a customs arrangement with the EU and subject to EU rules. This was what the ERG were objecting to. That NI would still be part of said rules was not a major issue for the ERG or most people in the UK outside of DUP voters.

Th UK wide backstop was designed to fit within Theresa May's absurd red lines. Johnson was happy to ditch the DUP and Northern Ireland the first chance he got.

ancapailldorcha

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

Th UK wide backstop was designed to fit within Theresa May's absurd red lines. Johnson was happy to ditch the DUP and Northern Ireland the first chance he got.

And the election's results in NI are a good sign in terms of them not deciding on a land border.

Chips Lovell

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

But isn't he introducing legislation that makes it illegal for him to ask for an extension? Or am I missing something?

It's just posturing. He can repeal it when the time comes.

Professor Moriarty

Chips Lovell wrote: »

It's just posturing. He can repeal it when the time comes.

So he'll pass a law and then repeal it six months later? Jaysus.

CelticRambler

Bit cynical wrote: »

We conceded on the UK wide backstop which would have removed two borders, one on the island and the other down the Irish sea.

"We" didn't concede anything. Ireland always accepted that that body of water called the Irish Sea was a de facto border, and the infrastructure is in place at all of our air and sea ports to enable checks on goods (and people) coming from non-EU countries.

The only thing that really mattered to Ireland was a border on the island of Ireland. Varadkar didn't concede on that point when he persuaded Johnson to sign the deal that the DUP had rejected; on the contrary, we/the EU suceeded in fast-forwarding the "unless and until" part of the backstop that scuppered May's government, getting an alternative arrangement in place that suited our agenda, not that of the ERG.

fly_agaric

First Up wrote: »

Which is exactly what he'll do.

Have not been a religious follower of events recently but I just can't see it ...not to extent we would wish here (BRINO).
I think he is going to do what he says (in this instance) & go for a more distant relationship with the EU that allows for US (or even a Chinese or Indian) trade deals & the like.

IMO best outcome we can hope for is that he's willing to "semi-detatch" NI to fix up the "Irish" border problems to secure trade agreements with the EU that will minimise the shock to the UK economy somewhat.
This might be on the cards because he doesn't have to listen to the DUPs whining any more. In fact I'd judge the Tories must be quite angry with the DUP (?), and won't be paying much attention to anything they say for quite some time.

Diverging properly from the EU & implementing "Global Britain"/"Singapore on Thames" concept and all that (IMO) nonsense seems to be ultimately more important for the Conservatives & their voters. than status of NI now.

Edit: sorry, just checked + above is not relevant, thought what is happening with NI was only a "settled" issue up to end of the transition period next year.
However I suppose the more the UK diverges after that, the more strain/problems it will cause for NI.

prawnsambo

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

So he'll pass a law and then repeal it six months later? Jaysus.

He's trying the same stunt that got him the original backstop with a different start date. Threaten the EU with a no deal exit in the hopes of getting a better deal. That worked out well the last time, so can only assume he's not a quick learner.

Professor Moriarty

prawnsambo wrote: »

He's trying the same stunt that got him the original backstop with a different start date. Threaten the EU with a no deal exit in the hopes of getting a better deal. That worked out well the last time, so can only assume he's not a quick learner.

Fair play to him. He'll try anything so. He's got a neck like a jockey's.

Zubeneschamali

prawnsambo wrote: »

He's trying the same stunt that got him the original backstop with a different start date. Threaten the EU with a no deal exit in the hopes of getting a better deal. That worked out well the last time, so can only assume he's not a quick learner.

It worked out well for Johnson, he won the election.

He doesn't actually care about the EU or the future relationship, just about how it all plays in the UK.

Bit cynical

CelticRambler wrote: »

"We" didn't concede anything. Ireland always accepted that that body of water called the Irish Sea was a de facto border, and the infrastructure is in place at all of our air and sea ports to enable checks on goods (and people) coming from non-EU countries.

The only thing that really mattered to Ireland was a border on the island of Ireland. Varadkar didn't concede on that point when he persuaded Johnson to sign the deal that the DUP had rejected; on the contrary, we/the EU suceeded in fast-forwarding the "unless and until" part of the backstop that scuppered May's government, getting an alternative arrangement in place that suited our agenda, not that of the ERG.

Well the May deal that we had been insisting upon up to a point a few weeks before was much better for Ireland from a trading point of view, I think you will agree. In that respect it could be argued that we backed down and accepted a lesser deal.

But I understand the need to present it as holding firm. And we did, as I said earlier, retain some protection from a border with NI which is better than nothing. What would have been worse was that the UK exited on no deal.

First Up

Professor Moriarty wrote:

Really? You think Johnson will agree to a CU and the SM next year?

By the time its finished it will be hard to tell the difference.

Professor Moriarty

First Up wrote: »

By the time its finished it will be hard to tell the difference.

Johnson doing a volte face on Brexit within months of being elected will reopen the Tory split. Large swathes of the Tory party will go bananas if he tries to sign up for Brino - the ERG and others are explicitly against a soft Brexit.