Brexit discussion thread XII (Please read OP before posting)

Bit cynical

GM228 wrote: »

Just because any potential further extension may be refused (Tusk left the impression there will be no more extensions) does not mean they will leave with the current deal, nothing is guaranteed.

They could of course revoke or hold a referendum without much public debate although I think both of these would be problematical.

Joe_ Public

briany wrote: »

All Corbyn would have to do would be to get around a table with the EU people and add some nice flowery language about jobs, protecting workers rights and the most vulnerable in society. No material changes, really, but a nice coat of red paint. The EU would probably roll their eyes and sigh about having to do this, but I think they'd eventually humour Corbyn.

I suspect youd have a labour delegation led by keir starmer and im inclined to believe that the EU, so relieved to have hard but grown up adults to finally deal with, would be more than willing to look at aspects of the deal all over again.

briany

Joe_ Public wrote: »

Chances of extension to hold public vote: 100 per cent.

The EU would be within their rights to say, "You've been 3 years trying to abide by the last referendum. What's to say this one will be any different?"

Joe_ Public

briany wrote: »

The EU would be within their rights to say, "You've been 3 years trying to abide by the last referendum. What's to say this one will be any different?"

Because if its remain they will obviously abide by it, without having actually to do anything much.

Bit cynical

Joe_ Public wrote: »

Chances of extension to hold public vote: 100 per cent.

While I'm not sure I'd go to 100%, I agree that if Corbyn requested an extension purely to hold a public vote he'd probably get it. But Corbyn wants to completely renegotiate the deal and only then submit it to a vote.

Strazdas

briany wrote: »

The EU would be within their rights to say, "You've been 3 years trying to abide by the last referendum. What's to say this one will be any different?"

The UK still has the option to revoke A50. The fact that this would be politically problematic for any UK party and would enrage the Daily Telegraph is not remotely the EU's problem.

quokula

The last couple of pages of discussion seem to be based on an imaginary Labour position of trying to squeeze more concessions out of the EU, when what they actually want is to drop the UK’s most harmful red lines which would be beneficial to both the UK and EU.

I have no idea why the EU would veto a closer, mutually beneficial relationship in favour of insisting on the hard Brexit the Tory’s have failed to get through Parliament the last three years.

CelticRambler

Irish Praetorian wrote: »

I'm not sure that I would really take you to task on much of your wider point, but the 'Schrödinger's Immigrant' meme is actually a pet peeve of mine. In it's more pure form it would only be truthful if there had been a single migrant to whichever country in question over whatever time period one chooses - and whatever one might make about differing perceptions it, that is clearly not the case.

<snip>

Now whilst the upshot of all this is that I think one can easily rubbish the Schroedinger's Migrant meme, to be fair I think there is also a lot to be said about the circumstances that have arisen in our society wherein so many in paid employment still need the support of the state, and what has happened with our property sector to leave it so expensive. My only one conclusion in that regard would be, I don't think it has much at all to do with being in/out of the EU.

I (genuinely) appreciate the pedantry, although to the best of my knowledge, Schrödinger never had an actual cat in a box either, so hypothetically speaking, we may yet discover that single migrant ... somewhere!

Regarding your conclusion, however, I agree: the relative (un)affordability of housing for large sections of the native population is a problem seen in many developed nations, and regions within nations (e.g. Cornwall) and can in no way be attributed to EU membership. Any link with the level of migrant wages (or income supplements) is dubious at best, and of course EU laws - as implemented in most member states, but not the UK - allow the host nation to refuse income supplements to EU migrants who cannot support themselves financially within three months of arrival.

Enzokk

I don't think this has been highlighted or picked up yet.

https://twitter.com/AdamRamsay/status/1190311342739210245?s=20

Johnson and Cummings under fire as police hand criminal evidence on Vote Leave to prosecution agency

After nearly 16 months of investigating Vote Leave, the Metropolitan Police Service (MPS) handed a file of evidence to the Crown Prosecution Service last month. The initial formal referral by the police means they are now seeking legal advice from the Crown Prosecution Service on how to further build their case against Vote Leave, and where they need further evidence to advance the prospect of charges being brought. Vote Leave have always denied any wrongdoing.

Vote Leave has been referred to the CPS to to see if there is criminal charges that can be made or to give them direction if more information is needed and where. I see this tweet is from yesterday so not sure if it has been picked up and I missed it or it has been ignored?

I guess there is still a chance nothing happens, in fact most likely seeing as we are talking about the PM, his special advisor and a lot of the cabinet was involved with Vote Leave. At the very least this should be an inconvenience for the PM in the upcoming election, but the world is upside down so I would not be surprised if this turns out to be a positive for Johnson.

CelticRambler

Bit cynical wrote: »

It was an insurance policy that prevented a hard border being introduced.

It was an insurance policy for which the customer never signed the contract and never paid the premium, so it prevented absolutely nothing.

You seem determined to argue in favour of vague future benefits based on the UK behaving in a reasonable and logical fashion, when instead the proposal awaiting ratification is based on hard and fast, workable arrangements that function more-or-less independently of a GB government that has proven itself to be unpredictable and completely unreliable.

Capt'n Midnight

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

Corbyn is in favour of a customs union.

But against freedom of movement though wavering a bit.

Also against common market because that would interfere with nationalisation of union voters jobs.

Roger_007

Bit cynical wrote: »

While I'm not sure I'd go to 100%, I agree that if Corbyn requested an extension purely to hold a public vote he'd probably get it. But Corbyn wants to completely renegotiate the deal and only then submit it to a vote.

It seems to me that both sides of the Brexit debate in the UK are under the impression that the EU actually wants the UK to remain in the EU. While that may have been true three years ago, I'm not so sure that it's still true.
A lot of water has gone under the bridge in the last three years and the mood in the EU seems to have changed. The UK has caused so much disruption with their indecision and party political shenanigans that the EU might be tempted to say to the UK 'take the deal that's on offer by Jan 31st or leave without a deal, there will be no more extensions or negotiations'.
I don't think 'remain' is a realistic option anymore.

Joe_ Public

Capt'n Midnight wrote: »

But against freedom of movement though wavering a bit.

Also against common market because that would interfere with nationalisation of union voters jobs.

Conference did pass a motion in favour of fom though, so that should or at least could push him further towards it. I dont see nationalisation being a deal breaker, there are new eu rules coming into play next couple of years but not sure theres any reason they couldnt secure opt outs.

looksee

Enzokk wrote: »

I don't think this has been highlighted or picked up yet.
Johnson and Cummings under fire as police hand criminal evidence on Vote Leave to prosecution agency

Vote Leave has been referred to the CPS to to see if there is criminal charges that can be made or to give them direction if more information is needed and where. I see this tweet is from yesterday so not sure if it has been picked up and I missed it or it has been ignored?

I guess there is still a chance nothing happens, in fact most likely seeing as we are talking about the PM, his special advisor and a lot of the cabinet was involved with Vote Leave. At the very least this should be an inconvenience for the PM in the upcoming election, but the world is upside down so I would not be surprised if this turns out to be a positive for Johnson.

Is someone orchestrating this? Trump impeachment and Johnson criminal case. Some strange coincidences going on.

briany

Doncaster Pro-Brexit demonstrations called off today as no-one was going to show up. Organisers blamed the failure of the demonstration on the shortage of protesters.

WomanSkirtFan8

briany wrote: »

Doncaster Pro-Brexit demonstrations called off today as no-one was going to show up. Organisers blamed the failure of the demonstration on the shortage of protesters.

Of course they'd say that, wouldn't they?. Sounds to me like people in the UK have now begun to finally wake up to what brexit really means.

Akrasia

Bit cynical wrote: »

A way to ensure that the UK leaves with the currently negotiated deal would for one EU government to refuse to extend the deadline beyond the end of January. If Labour got in, there would not be time to hold a referendum and they would have to leave with the deal.

If Labour are in power they would be more likely to revoke a50 than leave with BoJos deal

Especially if they rely on the lib dems as a coalition

looksee

briany wrote: »

Doncaster Pro-Brexit demonstrations called off today as no-one was going to show up. Organisers blamed the failure of the demonstration on the shortage of protesters.

I was just going to post this. Did they not realise how funny that is, failure of the demo due to lack of protesters? Well, yes...

briany

Akrasia wrote: »

If Labour are in power they would be more likely to revoke a50 than leave with BoJos deal

Especially if they rely on the lib dems as a coalition

They might table that proposal, but Labour rebels would ensure it didn't win a majority.

briany

looksee wrote: »

I was just going to post this. Did they not realise how funny that is, failure of the demo due to lack of protesters? Well, yes...

Well, UKIP elected a lad called Richard Braine as their leader and presumably expected people to take him seriously. Some of these Brexiteers aren't the brightest bulbs in the chandelier.

Focusing on Brexit alone misses the wider point.

The reality is that the EU is convulsed by the Eurosceptic surge - and that surge is likely to amplify over the coming decade.

One way or another, the European Union will be dead. Brexit is just the warning shot. Other countries will inevitably follow, with time and with enough pressure, and this egregious political entity will finally dissolve.

I for one welcome the terminal decline of the EU - not because I want to see a return to the 1930s (and in response to the 1930s point, what contributed to war in the 1940s was not nationalism, but imperialism), but because something far better can take its place.

What we need to see is a Council of Europe - with decisions taken by leaders of individual nation-states; not a centralised structure that blends all countries into one, with distant bureaucrats at the top, immune from national electorates.

fash

Bit cynical wrote: »

But the old backstop was indeed a trap for the UK, one that worked in Ireland's favor. The problem was that it was too good to be true. It wasn''t realistic and we had to back down over it in the end.

Actually it was (and was intended by UK negotiators as) a trap for the EU - allowing UK companies free access to the EU for goods to the UK without full set of LPF provisions that otherwise would be required- and no way out for the EU- while the UK always had a way out (cut off NI). However May failed to sell it and the narrative was lost.
The EU was relieved to see the back of it.

fash

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Focusing on Brexit alone misses the wider point.

The reality is that the EU is convulsed by the Eurosceptic surge - and that surge is likely to amplify over the coming decade.

One way or another, the European Union will be dead. Brexit is just the warning shot. Other countries will inevitably follow, with time and with enough pressure, and this egregious political entity will finally dissolve.

I for one welcome the terminal decline of the EU - not because I want to see a return to the 1930s (and in response to the 1930s point, what contributed to war in the 1940s was not nationalism, but imperialism), but because something far better can take its place.

What we need to see is a Council of Europe - with decisions taken by leaders of individual nation-states; not a centralised structure that blends all countries into one, with distant bureaucrats at the top, immune from national electorates.

Actually brexit has proved the value is the EU- Pro EU sentiment is up across the EU, small countries see how Ireland could being the UK to its knees through the EU, Euro sceptics in other countries no longer talk about leaving the EU - having seen how humiliated and diminished even large countries are by the process.
The UK however has certainly less than 15 years left in its current form.

fash

fash wrote: »

Euro sceptics in other countries no longer talk about leaving the EU - having seen how humiliated and diminished even large countries are by the process.

If anything, that's an argument in favor of Euroscepticism.

Bit cynical

fash wrote: »

Actually it was (and was intended by UK negotiators as) a trap for the EU - allowing UK companies free access to the EU for goods to the UK without full set of LPF provisions that otherwise would be required- and no way out for the EU- while the UK always had a way out (cut off NI). However May failed to sell it and the narrative was lost.
The EU was relieved to see the back of it.

Well yes there were reservations in the EU over it as you point out but it was also not liked by hard Brexiteers in the UK. But from Ireland's point of view it did trap the UK in a favourable trading relationship whereas Brexiteers might have favoured something more akin to a Canada style arrangement and this could still happen under the current WA and a Tory government.

woejus

Deleted User wrote: »

What we need to see is a Council of Europe

If your comment was a a wikipedia edit it would be reverted due to so many weasel words. Who is this "we" you speak of, tovarisch?

Deleted User wrote: »

I for one welcome the terminal decline of the EU

"I welcome my the roof of my house falling down, so I can build a new house in its place." You fix the roof, you fix the house you are living in.

briany

I think the Russian Federation is in terminal decline and fully support independence for its constituent republics.

woejus

woejus wrote: »

If your comment was a a wikipedia edit it would be reverted due to so many weasel words. Who is this "we" you speak of, tovarisch?

"I welcome my the roof of my house falling down, so I can build a new house in its place." You fix the roof, you fix the house you are living in.

What weasel words?

"We" as in the peoples of Europe.

My statement was that the Council of Europe should replace the EU, perhaps over a period of time, rather than dismantling the EU through some sort of violent revolution.

woejus

Deleted User wrote: »

What weasel words?

"We" as in the peoples of Europe.

My statement was that the Council of Europe should replace the EU, perhaps over a period of time, rather than dismantling the EU through some sort of violent revolution.

You don't speak for the entirety of the population of Europe. That kind of assumption laden, lazy thinking has the brits where they are now.

What weasel words? I'm loathe to "educate" what is likely a paid agent of a state entity, so here, fill your boots

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Weasel_word

Count how many weasel words you had in your previous comment? Let's see if you can beat that score in the next comment! Commenters of the world, unite!

RobMc59

[Deleted User] wrote: »

What weasel words?

"We" as in the peoples of Europe.

My statement was that the Council of Europe should replace the EU, perhaps over a period of time, rather than dismantling the EU through some sort of violent revolution.

Your vision won't go down well with those of a 'luddite' persuasion