Brexit discussion thread XII (Please read OP before posting)

ambro25

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

Johnson won't last until the next election, the knives will come out as soon as the EU relationship is settled.

Trump has. And for all the madness, it would be imprudent to write him off this year yet, when one takes a quick look at what shenanigans keep happening with voting systems and procedures, in primaries within Dems-heavy circonscriptions.

Johnson will last as long, as he remains useful to those who put him where he is.

It's a process, and he's a feature in it, not a bug.

I daresay Barnier and the EU27 know this only too well. Given that context, there is merit in maintaining a tecnocratic, apolitical approach to the negotiations, asking for heaps from the UK with clear and targeted landing zones underneath, and letting the UK claim 'victory' over a 'welching' EU when the UK inevitably gives the LZs up...all along factoring in, that the UK cannot be trusted to uphold its end of the bargain downstream, therefore sowing field-fulls of procedural and legal landmines in the deal.

In that context, it would not surprise me one bit to learn, one day, that the EU27/Barnier asked the Japanese to light up their own fire under the UK trade negotiators, for diluting their review/processing capacity.

Enzokk

I don't think anyone really knows what is going to happen. I see there is a story in the FT that we are moving towards a understanding on LPF.

https://twitter.com/tomhfh/status/1275903573864448002?s=20

Now ignore the assessment of the person tweeting the story because he is wrong, but this seems to suggest that we would head closer to BRINO. But then again we have the current government in charge and I don't think they have direction or a plan as other have said as well.

Take the story of Robert Jenrick, he who broke the lockdown rules as well and now seems to have approved a development after meeting with the developer at a Conservative Party fundraiser. The PM considers this not to be something he should lose his job for, so if this incompetence is allowed to happen, what else will the donors try to get away with?

Robert Jenrick under pressure to resign after donor-row documents released

The housing secretary, Robert Jenrick, is under pressure to resign after newly released documents indicated that he “insisted” a planning decision for a £1bn property development should be rushed through so a Conservative donor’s company could reduce costs by £45m.

In one document, a civil servant in the Ministry for Housing, Communities and Local Government wrote that the secretary of state (SoS) wanted the Westferry development in east London to be signed off the following day so that Richard Desmond’s company would avoid the community infrastructure levy (CIL).

“On timing, my understanding is that SoS is/was insistent that decision issued this week ie tomorrow – as next week the viability of the scheme is impacted by a change in the London CIL regime,” the official wrote.

Then again, seems like what everybody suspected has been confirmed. If you are a voter you can go fly a kite, but if you want access you need to go to a fundraiser,

https://twitter.com/AdamBienkov/status/1276058443670081537?s=20

These politicians are doing these things and getting away with it and they are also saying what you aren't supposed to out loud as well. Some brilliant talent Johnson has around him.

Peregrinus

ambro25 wrote: »

. . . In that context, it would not surprise me one bit to learn, one day, that the EU27/Barnier asked the Japanese to light up their own fire under the UK trade negotiators, for diluting their review/processing capacity.

It would astonish me.

A. Never explain with a conspiracy theory that which is perfectly explicable without one. Japan will pursue its own advantage with the EU needing to ask it to.

B. The uspide for the EU from such a strategy is trivial; the UK capacity is already thoroughly diluted. The downside, should it come to light, is colossal.

johnnyskeleton

Mod note:

Ive moved the demise of Labour etc posts to this thread:

https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2058058007

ambro25

Peregrinus wrote: »

It would astonish me.

A. Never explain with a conspiracy theory that which is perfectly explicable without one. Japan will pursue its own advantage without the EU needing to ask it to.

B. The uspide for the EU from such a strategy is trivial; the UK capacity is already thoroughly diluted. The downside, should it come to light, is colossal.

It's a negotiating theory, not a 'conspiracy' theory: it's simply a variation on the 'out-resource your opponent' approach to conflict management, which is as old as the hills.

I don't see the advantage for Japan, in pressurising the UK into a deal in the short 6 weeks timescale which they stipulated, which is well short of the October timescale for the EU/UK draft to start making the rounds. Why did they do that now?

Now I'm clearly in danger of missing a forest or three here, by the look of things...but I'm also struggling to see a 'colossal' downside for the EU, if that theory (and it is one, and nothing more than) turned put to be verified and come to light: so the EU is not behind using trade partners to exert a bit of influence in trade negotiations with 3rd parties? So what?

Will welcome your alternative views, as ever

ancapailldorcha

ambro25 wrote: »

It's a negotiating theory, not a 'conspiracy' theory: it's simply a variation on the 'out-resource your opponent' approach to conflict management, which is as old as the hills.

I don't see the advantage for Japan, in pressurising the UK into a deal in the short 6 weeks timescale which they stipulated, which is well short of the October timescale for the EU/UK draft to start making the rounds. Why did they do that now?

Now I'm clearly in danger of missing a forest or three here, by the look of things...but I'm also struggling to see a 'colossal' downside for the EU, if that theory (and it is one, and nothing more than) turned put to be verified and come to light: so the EU is not behind using trade partners to exert a bit of influence in trade negotiations with 3rd parties? So what?

Will welcome your alternative views, as ever

The Japanese will know that the UK is politically in a vulnerable position. The government needs to be seen doing trade deals so as to verify the global Britain chimera they used during the referendum and to minimise the damage they're about to inflict on the country as a result of erecting artificial trade barriers between the UK and it's largest export market.

The advantage for Japan is that they're now in a strong position in relation to the UK. They have double the population, are a major world power and have several politically significant investments in parts of the UK where Johnson is vulnerable, ie the Red Wall areas where Johnson was loaned votes of former Labour supporters.

The UK is a neophyte to negotiating international trade deals. The Japanese aren't going to settle for just rolling over the deal they had with the EU because they had to make compromises that they don't need with the UK. The 6-week deadline is just an upping of the ante. A UK trade deal will benefit them or they wouldn't pursue one but the UK is the weaker negotiating partner here so they can afford to play the brinkmanship game knowing that the government has a history of blinking.

ambro25

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

The Japanese will know that the UK is politically in a vulnerable position. The government needs to be seen doing trade deals so as to verify the global Britain chimera they used during the referendum and to minimise the damage they're about to inflict on the country as a result of erecting artificial trade barriers between the UK and it's largest export market.

The advantage for Japan is that they're now in a strong position in relation to the UK. They have double the population, are a major world power and have several politically significant investments in parts of the UK where Johnson is vulnerable, ie the Red Wall areas where Johnson was loaned votes of former Labour supporters.

The UK is a neophyte to negotiating international trade deals. The Japanese aren't going to settle for just rolling over the deal they had with the EU because they had to make compromises that they don't need with the UK. The 6-week deadline is just an upping of the ante. A UK trade deal will benefit them or they wouldn't pursue one but the UK is the weaker negotiating partner here so they can afford to play the brinkmanship game knowing that the government has a history of blinking.

I agree with the thrust of your argument, and in particular that Japan would not roll over the deal that they enjoyed with the UK as an EU member state. Why would they, particularly if the UK ends up without a deal by Jan 2021 and makes good on its declared intent to set-up a free-access-for-all under MFN.

What I don't get is, why pressure them now, and so hard/fast, ahead of the (notional) UK/EU deal...when they can perfectly well wait until 1st Jan 2021 and-

• in case of UK/EU deal by then, get substantially the same deal as they would now within 6 weeks (since -presumably- they have to keep their deal with the UK compatible with the existing EU/JP deal and a future UK/EU deal) ; or
• in case of de facto/accidental no deal, get a still better deal than they would now (the UK will still be a neophyte then, and still more desperate to conclude deals, any deals).

I take your points, and I have to ask: if that's the play, why isn't every other economy of any decent size (and there are a few, including superpowers with less stakeholding hang-ups than JP with its existing EU deal) setting the UK up against the wall and giving it 6 weeks or less?

Are the Japanese being cute and looking to bracket the UK and the EU here?

Peregrinus

Your initial suggestion was that the EU was seeking (successfully) to direct Japanese trade policy; now you're suggesting that Japan is looking to bracket the UK and the EU. You're ignoring the perfectly cromulent possiblity that Japan is acting in its own interests according to its own judgment. They are offering the UK a lousier deal than they have already agreed with the EU because they think the UK is in a poor negotiationg position and will accept the lousier deal. They want this to happen soon because they see the UK as politically unstable, and the combination of circumstances which will lead the UK to accept the lousier deal may not endure. In particular, they may think that the UK could cave to the EU later this year and so secure an EU trade deal, in which event the pressure to secure a trade deal with Japan will abate somewhat, and the UK might not then be so desparate as to sign up to a lousier deal than the one they are leaving.

ancapailldorcha

ambro25 wrote: »

I agree with the thrust of your argument, and in particular that Japan would not roll over the deal that they enjoyed with the UK as an EU member state. Why would they, particularly if the UK ends up without a deal by Jan 2021 and makes good on its declared intent to set-up a free-access-for-all under MFN.

What I don't get is, why pressure them now, and so hard/fast, ahead of the (notional) UK/EU deal...when they can perfectly well wait until 1st Jan 2021 and-

• in case of UK/EU deal by then, get substantially the same deal as they would now within 6 weeks (since -presumably- they have to keep their deal with the UK compatible with the existing EU/JP deal and a future UK/EU deal) ; or
• in case of de facto/accidental no deal, get a still better deal than they would now (the UK will still be a neophyte then, and still more desperate to conclude deals, any deals).

I take your points, and I have to ask: if that's the play, why isn't every other economy of any decent size (and there are a few, including superpowers with less stakeholding hang-ups than JP with its existing EU deal) setting the UK up against the wall and giving it 6 weeks or less?

Are the Japanese being cute and looking to bracket the UK and the EU here?

I don't really have a good answer I'm afraid. If the EU were up to shenanigans, we'd know about it as that sort of thing seems to leak very often. The British government is humiliating itself constantly. It does not need the EU's help to impoverish and fail its own citizens.

As for the Japanese the best guess I can give is a mixture of the pandemic and coronavirus. Japan has had less than 1,000 deaths compared to well over 40,000 in the UK. If their government feels that it's under control, perhaps due to the prevalence there of wearing masks and a possibly more compliant attitude to taking the government's advice then they've probably start to consider matters that were up for review pre-pandemic.

This article in the FT cites a need to avoid a gap in January as that's the end of the transition period that Johnson refuses to extend. According to the piece, 6 weeks is all the time the Japanese think they have to make the deal while allowing sufficient time for its ratification in the Diet.

The UK starts to work on alternative sat-nav system after losing access to EU systems.


https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-53192842

Brexit: UK starts work on buying own sat-nav system to rival Galileo

The government has begun the process of buying a UK-specific satellite navigation system.
PM Boris Johnson and Chancellor Rishi Sunak are understood to be keen on putting a 20% stake in satellite operator OneWeb.
The UK is unable to access the EU's Galileo satellite navigation system following Brexit.
The OneWeb system would be backup for the US-based Global Positioning System (GPS) if it is attacked or fails.
Otherwise, motorists, businesses and the military could be left without effective satellite navigation.

BonnieSituation

Deleted User wrote: »

The UK starts to work on alternative sat-nav system after losing access to EU systems.


https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-53192842

They have no idea what they're doing.

They had access to Galileo and could have kept that access if they wanted aren't so blind to their own stupidity.

listermint

Headline is hilarious.


'Starts Work'

implying they are building it with their own bare hands.

'On buying'

Oh look the reality of whats going on.

KildareP

Deleted User wrote: »

The UK starts to work on alternative sat-nav system after losing access to EU systems.


https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-53192842

Good grief - their recent handling of their alternative coronavirus app to Apple/Google and the recent ventilator challenge suggest this is only going to go one way...

CrabRevolution

Deleted User wrote: »

The UK starts to work on alternative sat-nav system after losing access to EU systems.


https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-53192842

Another retrospective "This is what we wanted all along" from the UK. Where Brexit was sold to the public as "Of course we'll still have access to the EUs resources at no cost after we leave. They'd hardly exclude the mighty UK."

Now it's "Leaving the EU has finally allowed us to create our own X, which we've always wanted". Conveniently leaving out the increased costs, decreased reach, duplication of resources etc.

Worst of all it's not even for the purpose of gaining anything, but they've to expend huge energy and resources just to try and stand still and maintain what they had before.

Tell me how

KildareP wrote: »

Good grief - their recent handling of their alternative coronavirus app to Apple/Google and the recent ventilator challenge suggest this is only going to go one way...

It's ok, they're only putting 500M in to it.

Professor Moriarty

Merkel changing tack today. Having persistently taken a soft line with the UK while maintaining an open door policy to negotiations, she now believes that the EU pandemic finance package is much more important. Also, she thinks that the EU should now accept and prepare for no deal and that it is now up to the UK to come up with acceptable compromises.

Frank Bullitt

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

Merkel changing tack today. Having persistently taken a soft line with the UK while maintaining an open door policy to negotiations, she now believes that the EU pandemic finance package is much more important. Also, she thinks that the EU should now accept and prepare for no deal and that it is now up to the UK to come up with acceptable compromises.

This strikes me as the big thing the Brits have overplayed/not planned for (have they planned for anything?), with the EU and the world going through what it is right now, focus will shift to actual matters that the EU have to account for.

The UK thinks that they are only concerned about the trade deal, but that is slipping further and further down the list.

Reality hits hard.

Professor Moriarty

Gintonious wrote: »

This strikes me as the big thing the Brits have overplayed/not planned for (have they planned for anything?), with the EU and the world going through what it is right now, focus will shift to actual matters that the EU have to account for.

The UK thinks that they are only concerned about the trade deal, but that is slipping further and further down the list.

Reality hits hard.

That Tory government doesn't care. They're blinded by nationalistic hubris. The pandemic response and their attitude to Brexit demonstrate that the ordinary citizen doesn't matter. It's all about elitist exceptionalism.

First Up

Gintonious wrote:

This strikes me as the big thing the Brits have overplayed/not planned for (have they planned for anything?), with the EU and the world going through what it is right now, focus will shift to actual matters that the EU have to account for.

Germany takes over the EU presidency next week. Their priorities are the EU budget and Covid. The UK will not be indulged.

CelticRambler

Deleted User wrote: »

The UK starts to work on alternative sat-nav system after losing access to EU systems.

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-53192842

Why do the phrases "ferry company" and "pest control" flicker in my mind ...?

“The fundamental starting point is, yes, we’ve bought the wrong satellites,” said Dr Bleddyn Bowen, a space policy expert at the University of Leicester. “OneWeb is working on basically the same idea as Elon Musk’s Starlink: a mega-constellation of satellites in low Earth orbit, which are used to connect people on the ground to the internet.

OneWeb’s satellites, 74 of which have already been launched, are in a low Earth orbit, just 1,200km up.

Bowen said: “If you want to replace GPS for military-grade systems, where you need encrypted, secure signals that are precise to centimetres, I’m not sure you can do that on satellites as small as OneWeb’s.”

It’s bolting an unproven technology on to a mega-constellation that’s designed to do something else. It’s a tech and business gamble.”

looksee

Tell me how wrote: »

It's ok, they're only putting 500M in to it.

Meanwhile, in a uk town the size of Waterford city, all roads bar one, in and out of the area (and it is part of a conurbation), flood on a regular basis. These are roads that never flooded before (I lived there and sister still does) and when they flood it can take 40 minutes to drive out the one good road - which of course everyone else is on - to get to adjacent towns.

The reason? The road drains are not being cleared. They are not being cleared because the urban council gave residents a choice in what were considered essential services as they did not have enough government money to do all the jobs that needed to be done. Obviously when things like the fire service took priority, things like road cleaning (which includes drains) go down the list.

Of course, if they all lived on the sunlit uplands they wouldn't have flood problems. :rolleyes:

Enzokk

First Up wrote: »

Germany takes over the EU presidency next week. Their priorities are the EU budget and Covid. The UK will not be indulged.

Here is a story on this,

Angela Merkel: UK must live with consequences of weaker ties to EU

The UK will have to “live with the consequences” of Boris Johnson ditching Theresa May’s plan to maintain close economic ties with the EU after Brexit, Angela Merkel has said, hardening her tone over the prospect of a no-deal scenario at the end of the year.

After more than three years in which the German chancellor repeatedly emphasised her openness to a deal that would maintain the UK’s current flows of trade with the bloc, she suggested the door leading to such a compromise had now closed.

“We need to let go of the idea that it is for us to define what Britain should want,” Merkel said in a wide-ranging interview with a small group of European newspapers, including the Guardian. “That is for Britain to define – and we, the EU27, will respond appropriately.”

Speaking days before Germany takes over the EU rotating presidency, Merkel made clear that her priority was instead to push through a pandemic rescue plan to stop Europe’s economy sliding into the worst slump since the 1930s.

This confirms what others have posted, the priorities for Germany is not a close relationship with the UK at all costs, but the EU budget and a response to the Covid-19 pandemic.

BonnieSituation

Tell me how wrote: »

It's ok, they're only putting 500M in to it.

Given it is a bankrupt company that they are investing in, I would wonder if yet again it's a Grayling or Jenrick sort of investment.

---


It was great to see Mutti come out today with that statement. I think we're all just bored and done with the UK now.

eire4

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

Merkel changing tack today. Having persistently taken a soft line with the UK while maintaining an open door policy to negotiations, she now believes that the EU pandemic finance package is much more important. Also, she thinks that the EU should now accept and prepare for no deal and that it is now up to the UK to come up with acceptable compromises.

I would tend to agree with Merkel there. The response to support EU economies due to the pandemic is IMHO by far the top priority. While in terms of the UK at this point best to plan for no deal and if the UK actually lands itself back on planet earth and wants to actually put a deal together great but it really does not look like they are at all interested and or in touch with reality as of yet.

declanflynn

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

Merkel changing tack today. Having persistently taken a soft line with the UK while maintaining an open door policy to negotiations, she now believes that the EU pandemic finance package is much more important. Also, she thinks that the EU should now accept and prepare for no deal and that it is now up to the UK to come up with acceptable compromises.

Fair play to her, the UK were given enough time to be reasonable, I think even the uk's own people will begin to see tru the Brexit lies soon

That satellite thing is completely and utterly absurd. Surely some of these decision makers have a child who has a passing interest in this stuff or reads some Ars Technica.. How can these decisions come about with so many people involved?

Leroy42

Enzokk wrote: »

Here is a story on this,

Angela Merkel: UK must live with consequences of weaker ties to EU



This confirms what others have posted, the priorities for Germany is not a close relationship with the UK at all costs, but the EU budget and a response to the Covid-19 pandemic.

While I agree on the priorities, I read her statement slightly differently. She states “That is for Britain to define – and we, the EU27, will respond appropriately.” Which to me implies that up until now the EU have been trying to make the UK make a certain choice, or even not really a choice but the only option.

So are the EU finally signalling that they ow accept the UK has left, accept that the UK won't give fishing right, LPF etc and need to make the best of a bad lot? David Frost has been pushing that line since Johnson took over, that the UK will not compromise and the EU need to wake up to that fact.

The question then becomes what the consequences of that stance turn out to be. If recovering from Covid economically is a high priority is cutting off significant trade with the UK really the right choice?

Enzokk

Leroy42 wrote: »

While I agree on the priorities, I read her statement slightly differently. She states “That is for Britain to define – and we, the EU27, will respond appropriately.” Which to me implies that up until now the EU have been trying to make the UK make a certain choice, or even not really a choice but the only option.

So are the EU finally signalling that they ow accept the UK has left, accept that the UK won't give fishing right, LPF etc and need to make the best of a bad lot? David Frost has been pushing that line since Johnson took over, that the UK will not compromise and the EU need to wake up to that fact.

The question then becomes what the consequences of that stance turn out to be. If recovering from Covid economically is a high priority is cutting off significant trade with the UK really the right choice?

I don't know, but her quotes seem to indicate what she is trying to say,

“With Prime Minister Boris Johnson, the British government wants to define for itself what relationship it will have with us after the country leaves,” Merkel said. “It will then have to live with the consequences, of course, that is to say with a less closely interconnected economy.

“If Britain does not want to have rules on the environment and the labour market or social standards that compare with those of the EU, our relations will be less close. That will mean it does not want standards to go on developing along parallel lines.”

So this is the EU not trying to hold the UK to the PD any longer, but it is now for Frost and Johnson to define what PD they actually wanted and the EU will adjust once they have decided what they want.

KildareP

Enzokk wrote: »

So this is the EU not trying to hold the UK to the PD any longer, but it is now for Frost and Johnson to define what PD they actually wanted and the EU will adjust once they have decided what they want.

Of course, the UK will use the later to complain that the EU are unilaterally changing the PD to suit the EU! The UK wants to ignore the bits that do not suit but expects the EU to continue to commit to the bits that do suit the UK.

Then again, this isn't an honest negotiation, rather, its a game of deception and blame shifting so maybe they've (EU leaders collectively) given up on diplomacy and just stopped caring anymore...

CelticRambler

Leroy42 wrote: »

While I agree on the priorities, I read her statement slightly differently. She states “That is for Britain to define – and we, the EU27, will respond appropriately.” Which to me implies that up until now the EU have been trying to make the UK make a certain choice, or even not really a choice but the only option.

So are the EU finally signalling that they ow accept the UK has left, accept that the UK won't give fishing right, LPF etc and need to make the best of a bad lot?

None of that comes across to me from her (translated) words; instead it's a clear message stating "define some realistic objectives and tell us what they are (p.s. look at the Barnier Staircase if you don't know what realistic means)"

I'd say any implication that the EU has been making decisions on the UK's behalf is simply a statement of fact - they EU has had to decide what to do/what on-going favours to grant because the UK wasted too much time grandstanding for its domestic audience after Art.50 was triggered.

An analogy would be the divorced wife telling her ex that she'd gone through his shed, picked out the tools and materials he wanted to take with him, and packed them up; but now she's done with him, she'll leave the box on the path outside the house for him. Whether it's still there whenever he finally
comes to collect it isn't her concern any more.