Brexit discussion thread XIII (Please read OP before posting)

trellheim

I'd be concerned that the Tories are simply going to push ahead with the Internal Market Bill

They have to use the Parliament Act to do so to override the Lords, given that kind of majority and there's a 1-year brake built into that override

which means that unless they solve it in the ping-pong it wont become law till next year

fash

Mr.Nice Guy wrote: »

I'd be concerned that the Tories are simply going to push ahead with the Internal Market Bill but ramp up the rhetoric that they're doing it to protect the peace process, under a mistaken belief that by saying it over and over the Biden administration will believe it. That tactic might work on people in Britain, but we see through it over here, and the Biden administration will too.

I don't believe the mistaken belief part. They aren't that ill informed.

One plausible scenario is the following:
.

To me there is a reasonable possibility that no deal is the plan.
I must say I'm rather skeptical about the plausibility of Tory intentions to pour billions of state aid into building trillion dollar companies (while not using the methods already available to do so).
It sounds more a "goes down smooth" explanation for the masses rather than an actual principle.

But at this stage, I'm honestly not sure which way the UK will jump. - I'd be slightly surprised by them taking either course is action.

Peregrinus

Well, if the UK can't make up its mind, no-FTA is the default outcome.

It's not an outcome that can endure for very long, though, since it will be horrible, just horrible, for the UK, and any popular political will to sustain it will evaporate quite quickly. And of course there won't be much popular political will to sustain it even to start with, if it happens simply because the UK couldn't agree with itself what it wanted to happen.

So what puzzles me is, for those hard-Brexiters who are hoping or scheming for a no-FTA end to transition, what's the game plan for after 1 January? How do they see events playing out?

fash

Peregrinus wrote: »

So what puzzles me is, for those hard-Brexiters who are hoping or scheming for a no-FTA end to transition, what's the game plan for after 1 January? How do they see events playing out?

3 possibilities:
1. either they believe they can get a sufficient part of their population to blame the EU and put up with the misery on that basis - and relying on the UK political/electoral system so that they don't need to care about what the other citizens say for a few years - potentially then thinking about a more "truly Canadian" deal with tariffs and a "let's see who needs who" thing over a 10 year time period ; or
2. They crash it and let someone else tidy up their mess and keep to the "this end point isn't our fault" "you should have just followed the plan" etc.; Or
3. They really don't want any relationship with the EU that the EU is likely to give them - everything else does from that and they have no other plans or proposal.

Edit to add: I've honestly no idea what will happen and I vacillate between thinking a deal will be made and one cannot.

Zubeneschamali

Peregrinus wrote: »

So what puzzles me is, for those hard-Brexiters who are hoping or scheming for a no-FTA end to transition, what's the game plan for after 1 January? How do they see events playing out?

My question is if No Deal was the goal all along, why not walk away from talks and start actually preparing for No Deal?

It would do a lot of damage if they were as ready as possible - but if, as looks likely, they stumble into it at the last minute with no preparation, it will be a catastrophe, it won't last more than a few weeks before they'll need emergency EU food and medical aid.

Not a good look.

listermint

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

My question is if No Deal was the goal all along, why not walk away from talks and start actually preparing for No Deal?

It would do a lot of damage if they were as ready as possible - but if, as looks likely, they stumble into it at the last minute with no preparation, it will be a catastrophe, it won't last more than a few weeks before they'll need emergency EU food and medical aid.

Not a good look.

Because even within the government and even the erg only some of them are absolute idiots. The rest were along for the ride. Let's go with the crowd and see where this takes us. I'm sure someone will fix this and come up with a plan..... But there is and was no one.

The whole thing is a folly of circumstance. I'd say the majority of the erg were in there for the additional expense claims and free lunches. These aren't bright people.

Leroy42

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

My question is if No Deal was the goal all along, why not walk away from talks and start actually preparing for No Deal?

It would do a lot of damage if they were as ready as possible - but if, as looks likely, they stumble into it at the last minute with no preparation, it will be a catastrophe, it won't last more than a few weeks before they'll need emergency EU food and medical aid.

Not a good look.

I think they really believe that the EU will give them what they want. Look back at the referendum, and even since. Leave is basically keeping all the benefits because the EU needs them more. I don't think that is just a soundbite, it is anchored in a belief.

Second, I think that no deal really means, to them, not getting everything they want but having loads of side deals meaning nothing much changes.

Arlene Foster was on Twitter yesterday imploring the EU to sort out the issues with NI food imports from UK. I think it is a perfect example of those that are fully behind Brexit expecting the EU to sort everything out and nothing much will actually change.

I think they believe that the timing, the last few weeks are their strongest position. They fully expect the EU to be the adult in the room, that by acting out the 'parent' will give in for the greater good.

They haven't thought beyond that, to what happens if it doesn't work. I think even the admission that customs won't be ready until at least July 2021 shows that they don't think it a big deal. That things will simply carry on as normal because, well why not doesn't it work that way now?

Peregrinus

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

My question is if No Deal was the goal all along, why not walk away from talks and start actually preparing for No Deal?

It would do a lot of damage if they were as ready as possible - but if, as looks likely, they stumble into it at the last minute with no preparation, it will be a catastrophe, it won't last more than a few weeks before they'll need emergency EU food and medical aid.

Not a good look.

I agree with this. But your question ("If no deal was the goal all along . . .") assumes that there was a goal all along. My own suspicion is that the UK - not the country at large, but those driving this project - have never agreed on a goal or, at best, they have only ever been ble to agree on an unrealistic, wishful thinking goal.

You recall the Brexit trilemma:



Of the three Brexit objectives, the UK can acheive any two, but a solution that delivers all three is unattainable, as indicated by the unicorn in the Venn diagram. The only goal that brexiters have ever been able to agree on is the unicorn goal. The current WA and NIP puts the UK in quadrant A in the Venn diagram, which is not something they agree about.

Some may believe, against all logic and sense, that the unattainable goal is in fact attainable. And, furthermore, they expect to attain it. They think that if they leave the EU, if need be without a trade deal, and fail to implement the NI protocol they'll acheive objectives 1 and 2, and the EU will be too scared, or too pragmatic, to control the Irish border, and so they'll also objective goal 3.

Others realise that, no, this won't happen, but they are willing to forego objective 3 (because as far as they are concerned it's the least important). They'd accept ending up in Quadrant B. And they hope to blame the EU for putting up border controls in Ireland. The problem with this, as they must realise, is that that story won't wash in the US, and it puts the kibosh on any prospect of a UK/US trade deal. So they have to decide how much they care about that, and how much their voters will care. This group probably reckons it was a mistake to big up the prospects of a wondrous US trade deal ; even the best attainable US deal was never going to be that crash-hot in terms of the benefits it would confer on the UK, and maybe if that can be got across the voters won't care too much that no US trade deal has happened.

The other problem with this line of reasoning is the assumption that, if the UK reneges on the NIP, the EU's only response will be to erect border controls in Ireland. Erecting border controls won't even be the EU's first response, never mind its only one. Their first step will be to explore what can be done to put effective pressure on the UK to observe the obligations it has undertaken. Between the fact that the law is on the EU's side, and the fact that it is much the larger and more powerful party in the EU/UK relationship, there are a lot of measures the EU could adopt to try and put manners on the UK. The EU isn't talking about this out loud because (a) it would inflame matters, which they have always sought to avoid, and (b) it would enable them to be framed as a bully, which is not to their advantage, and (c) why commit to any course of action before you have to? But you can be pretty sure they are thinking about it.

Presumably, there's a group of Brexit leaders who are realistic enough to accept both that the unicorn goal is unattainable, and that any hope that the EU will meekly accept the UK violating its treaty commitments in oder to get to Quadrant B with no repercussions is also delusional. And this is the group that I am particularly wondering about. Do they think that the UK's best course is to fight this fight and, if so, how do they see it playing out? Or are they the ones who are saying to Johnson no, you will not get away with this, you have to make a deal? Quadrant A is not great, but it's the best that's actually attainable?

fash

Peregrinus wrote: »

Presumably, there's a group of Brexit leaders who are realistic enough to accept both that the unicorn goal is unattainable, and that any hope that the EU will meekly accept the UK violating its treaty commitments in oder to get to Quadrant B with no repercussions is also delusional. And this is the group that I am particularly wondering about. Do they think that the UK's best course is to fight this fight and, if so, how do they see it playing out? Or are they the ones who are saying to Johnson no, you will not get away with this, you have to make a deal? Quadrant A is not great, but it's the best that's actually attainable?

Excellent analysis.

This last group may partly consist of people who think "maybe I'm wrong, let's see what happens", those whose option B is "stay in power as long as possible and always blame someone else".
(One of your assumptions seems to be that they have a long term plan for the UK and have the interests of the UK in mind when they are doing it).
Plus of course, they are all wrestling with the steering wheel and the car can crash off the cliff while they are.

CelticRambler

Leroy42 wrote: »

I think even the admission that customs won't be ready until at least July 2021 shows that they don't think it a big deal. That things will simply carry on as normal because, well why not doesn't it work that way now?

This sounds very much like the same distorted vaunting of Britain's place in the world based on 40 years' membership of the EU that we saw in the run-up to the referendum, and in the subsequent justification of triggering Article 50. From the earliest days, one repeatedly promoted meaning of "Brexit" was "nothing will change (for the worse)" and yet change is what was promised.

trellheim

Amidst all the bluster,

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2020/11/10/government-delays-internal-market-bill-vote-end-month/

UK Gov has delayed the IMB Commons vote till end Nov an obvious kick to touch while in the tunnel so all eyes shift to Brussels .

Expect some news soon I reckon

An Ciarraioch

Orkney fishing boat owners worry that immigration rules impede their ability to hire non-EEA crew:

https://www.pressandjournal.co.uk/fp/news/politics/uk-politics/2639242/orkney-fishermen-turn-on-boris-johnson-over-bitterly-disappointing-immigration-rules/amp/?__twitter_impression=true

Strazdas

trellheim wrote: »

Amidst all the bluster,

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2020/11/10/government-delays-internal-market-bill-vote-end-month/

UK Gov has delayed the IMB Commons vote till end Nov an obvious kick to touch while in the tunnel so all eyes shift to Brussels .

Expect some news soon I reckon

Though that is not the same thing as taking it off the table. The EU side will still view this with suspicion and as an obstacle.....it doesn't take the IMB factor out of the talks equation.

ath262

trellheim wrote: »

Amidst all the bluster,

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2020/11/10/government-delays-internal-market-bill-vote-end-month/

UK Gov has delayed the IMB Commons vote till end Nov an obvious kick to touch while in the tunnel so all eyes shift to Brussels .

Expect some news soon I reckon

seems that some in London still think that the threat of the IMB in the background will force the EU to give in to some of their crazy expectations on Level Paying Field and Fishings talks ... they can dream on

Brussels Sprout

An Ciarraioch wrote: »

Orkney fishing boat owners worry that immigration rules impede their ability to hire non-EEA crew:

https://www.pressandjournal.co.uk/fp/news/politics/uk-politics/2639242/orkney-fishermen-turn-on-boris-johnson-over-bitterly-disappointing-immigration-rules/amp/?__twitter_impression=true

I was on a stag party in 2018 that happened to also have 2 Orkney fishermen on it. They were both full-throated Brexiteers due to the perceived economic benefits to their profession. It would be a delicious irony if that was hampered due to lack of available cheap labour due to stricter Brexit immigration rules.

johnnyskeleton

Brussels Sprout wrote: »

I was on a stag party in 2018 that happened to also have 2 Orkney fishermen on it. They were both full-throated Brexiteers due to the perceived economic benefits to their profession. It would be a delicious irony if that was hampered due to lack of available cheap labour due to stricter Brexit immigration rules.

A more significant problem for them, in the event of a no deal, is that they will no longer have tarriff free access to their most important markets. The lack of cheap labour is the least of their worries, and it is in turn worrying that they do not realise the much more significant threat to their business.

Strazdas

Brussels Sprout wrote: »

I was on a stag party in 2018 that happened to also have 2 Orkney fishermen on it. They were both full-throated Brexiteers due to the perceived economic benefits to their profession. It would be a delicious irony if that was hampered due to lack of available cheap labour due to stricter Brexit immigration rules.

It illustrates how many ordinary workers and tradespeople were wide open to the three word slogans of the Brexit charlatans. Gaslighting of an entire nation and people thinking there would be no personal consequences whatsoever for ticking an X in a box.

Hundreds of books will be written about this in future.

serfboard

Strazdas wrote: »

It illustrates how many ordinary workers and tradespeople were wide open to the three word slogans of the Brexit charlatans. Gaslighting of an entire nation and people thinking there would be no personal consequences whatsoever for ticking an X in a box.

And (ironically) xenophobic morons like Pritti Patel thinking that, hang the consequences, we'll just block all foreigners from coming to Britain after Brexit - "Promises made, promises kept", as Donald Trump might say.

Strazdas

serfboard wrote: »

And (ironically) xenophobic morons like Pritti Patel thinking that, hang the consequences, we'll just block all foreigners from coming to Britain after Brexit - "Promises made, promises kept", as Donald Trump might say.

What amazes me is how many people voted Leave knowing there was no way back out of it if it all went belly up. If there was a prospect of a second referendum, you could understand 52% of people voting for it but to opt for Leave when there was a very distinct possibility it could wreck the economy is off the wall.

Things weren't even that bad in 2016 : UK was not in recession and was in full employment.

Leroy42

Strazdas wrote: »

What amazes me is how many people voted Leave knowing there was no way back out of it if it all went belly up. If there was a prospect of a second referendum, you could understand 52% of people voting for it but to opt for Leave when there was a very distinct possibility it could wreck the economy is off the wall.

Things weren't even that bad in 2016 : UK was not in recession and was in full employment.

Because they believed there was no downside. Only upside. everything would be exactly the same, except for immigration, money and laws.

Why wouldn't you vote for that? If someone offered that you could leave the club, stop paying fees and being covered by the regulations, but you could continue to play and make up whatever rules suited you, wouldn't you accept it?

They were sold a fantasy, otherwise known as a lie. Although I do think there was a mixture of many of the main proponents that simply never believed it would happen, but would look good that they founght the good fight, and those that actually believed that the UK would hold all the cards and it would be easy and only benefits would accrue.

Tell me how

Strazdas wrote: »

What amazes me is how many people voted Leave knowing there was no way back out of it if it all went belly up. If there was a prospect of a second referendum, you could understand 52% of people voting for it but to opt for Leave when there was a very distinct possibility it could wreck the economy is off the wall.

Things weren't even that bad in 2016 : UK was not in recession and was in full employment.

Vote in 2016, I can understand. Remain campaign was fragmented and very lackadaisical.

Can understand General election in 2017, many people had started to pay closer attention leading to conservatives losing some of their majority while still remaining in power.

Could not and cannot understand General Election in 2019 with the complete fiasco that that entire year had been in terms of Brexit and Westminster division and yet the Tories increasing to an 80 seat majority.

We have no way of determining but I think so much of this was down to Jeremy Corbyn's inability to provide a meaningful push back against the continue promise of a Brexit which had been proven to be similar in name only to that which had been promised.

He was such an idealistic man in terms of the common good for all in society and yet could not step back to see what Brexit was doing and would do to most in society.

trellheim

Rumblings coming out of the tunnel that much work left to do ( no , really ? )


From the Sun of all place but Mujtaba Rahman also saying this https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/brexit/13169752/brexit-deadline-this-week-missed-legal/

so ....

serfboard

Tell me how wrote: »

Could not and cannot understand General Election in 2019 with the complete fiasco that that entire year had been in terms of Brexit and Westminster division

The second part of your statement answers your first - people were sick and tired of the chaos and fiasco and did indeed, simply want to "Get Brexit done" - which is why it was such a great slogan.

Many Northern Red Wall Labour supporters acknowledged that they were "lending" their support to the Tories for one election only.

Mr.Wemmick

The fact that this situation is incredibly bizarre, so crazy in the way that Johnson and Cummings are playing it, do any of you think that the end goal is to kick it down the road at the last minute and blame the EU? Or possibly sell it in such a way to make it appear to the domestic audience that the British have to help the poor, incompetent EU for a little longer?

The only side that are trying in earnest to finish this, get it completed/sorted, and the UK out, is the EU.

So what gives? HMG are acting like they do not really want to go, and mostly because they do not know how.

Patser

trellheim wrote: »

Rumblings coming out of the tunnel that much work left to do ( no , really ? )


From the Sun of all place but Mujtaba Rahman also saying this https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/brexit/13169752/brexit-deadline-this-week-missed-legal/

so ....

Reuters also saying negotiations will be going on late, but crucially and for 1st time I'm seeing 'Agreed text is expected' . So some sort of deal on the way


https://twitter.com/Suewilson91/status/1326486133522493440

Strazdas

Leroy42 wrote: »

Because they believed there was no downside. Only upside. everything would be exactly the same, except for immigration, money and laws.

Why wouldn't you vote for that? If someone offered that you could leave the club, stop paying fees and being covered by the regulations, but you could continue to play and make up whatever rules suited you, wouldn't you accept it?

They were sold a fantasy, otherwise known as a lie. Although I do think there was a mixture of many of the main proponents that simply never believed it would happen, but would look good that they founght the good fight, and those that actually believed that the UK would hold all the cards and it would be easy and only benefits would accrue.

I would suggest too though there was an underlying nastiness and cynicism with the Leave vote. A feeling that other people would be screwed over by Brexit but not the person putting the X in the Leave box, they would escape any negative stuff.

Breezer

Mr.Wemmick wrote: »

The fact that this situation is incredibly bizarre, so crazy in the way that Johnson and Cummings are playing it, do any of you think that the end goal is to kick it down the road at the last minute and blame the EU? Or possibly sell it in such a way to make it appear to the domestic audience that the British have to help the poor, incompetent EU for a little longer?

The only side that are trying in earnest to finish this, get it completed/sorted, and the UK out, is the EU.

So what gives? HMG are acting like they do not really want to go, and mostly because they do not know how.

If that is their game, and I honestly don’t think it is, they won’t succeed. They’ve already left the EU, written it into law that they can’t ask for an extension to the transition period, stacked the House of Commons with true believers, and promised to a baying public to “get Brexit done.” Boris would be out on his ear if he tried that.

And that’s assuming the EU would entertain more can kicking without any actual new proposals. I’d imagine Macron, in particular, would have quite a bit to say about that.

screamer

Brussels Sprout wrote: »

I was on a stag party in 2018 that happened to also have 2 Orkney fishermen on it. They were both full-throated Brexiteers due to the perceived economic benefits to their profession. It would be a delicious irony if that was hampered due to lack of available cheap labour due to stricter Brexit immigration rules.

Worse than that, is that tariffs could make their fish unsellable due to price. So, I hope they’ve thought this through. I do remember something about Cummings father in law saying Borris plans to step down in the new year. I guess like all of them, Farage, Cameron, May, easy to take a country into a crisis, not easy to lead them out.....

McGiver

Patser wrote:

Reuters also saying negotiations will be going on late, but crucially and for 1st time I'm seeing 'Agreed text is expected' . So some sort of deal on the way

Unlikely. That article doesn't say so.

Also, if the offending clauses in the IMB aren't removed any deal (if agreed) won't come into effect.

I suppose the EP would scrutinise and EU27 ratify it but only provisionally.

There's going to be a no-deal period, because of this, however short it is.

eire4

McGiver wrote: »

Unlikely. That article doesn't say so.

Also, if the offending clauses in the IMB aren't removed any deal (if agreed) won't come into effect.

I suppose the EP would scrutinise and EU27 ratify it but only provisionally.

There's going to be a no-deal period, because of this, however short it is.

I tend to think your right about there being some kind of period without a deal with them and you know after all that has gone on the past 4 years it might be for the best. Maybe they will wake up and re-join the rest of the EU on planet earth with a bit of pain that a no deal situation would cause. Hopefully it would not take too long but I really think this might be the only thing that would wake them up and bring them back to reality.