Brexit discussion thread XIII (Please read OP before posting)

listermint

54and56 wrote: »

They just have!!

https://twitter.com/vonderleyen/status/1336973232159776769

In short we can talk all you like we can talk till the cows come home. But action plan B will be in place and operate all the while we talk.

Let's see which side can hold out the longest whilst also talking and I mean next year.

Patser

Those contingency plans, especially regarding road freight for 6 months, would again push the real impact of Brexit a further 6 months down the road.

On last night's meeting, thanks CelticRambler for the European perspective. It probably was that Johnson completely overinflated his attendance and expected fireworks either way, only to find VDL calmly diffusing the showdown with talk of more talks, refusing to give Johnson his moment without looking the child (more than his physical, scruffy appearance last night draws comparison) and instead left him clueless as to what to do next, except to slip quietly home - no fireworks, no speeches, no rhetoric

CelticRambler

54and56 wrote: »

They just have!!

https://twitter.com/vonderleyen/status/1336973232159776769

Air connectivity - provided the UK ensures the same

Road connectivity - provided the UK ensures the same

And not stated, but worth pointing out: visa-free travel provided the UK ensures the same

Would it really be that hard for Johnson & Co. to put out a statement - and bring a proposal to the HoC - guaranteeing these limited and specific :rolleyes: reciprocal arrangements?

Enzokk

The UK will find out quickly that they are entering into a world they have not really been aware of as part of the EU. A lot of work was done by the EU and they are going to have to learn quickly and on the job.

https://twitter.com/JJHTweets/status/1336940018909270016?s=20

Basically they announced they weren't going to collect tariffs agreed by the WTO against the US in the Boeing dispute. The US welcomed the decision, but also points out they have no legal standing to collect tariffs even if they wanted to. The US by the way will still collect tariffs as they not only included the EU but also the UK along with France, Germany and Spain in the action. So the UK leaving the EU has no effect and tariffs can and will be collected against the UK.

Sam Russell

CelticRambler wrote: »

Air connectivity - provided the UK ensures the same

Road connectivity - provided the UK ensures the same

And not stated, but worth pointing out: visa-free travel provided the UK ensures the same

Would it really be that hard for Johnson & Co. to put out a statement - and bring a proposal to the HoC - guaranteeing these limited and specific :rolleyes: reciprocal arrangements?

This temporary arrangement is for six months.

As an aside, what happens to UK registered cars in Ireland after the 1st Jan 2001 or the end of the above? Will NI registered vehicles be treated differently? Will the Gardai have access to the UK vehicle and driver databases? Will green cards be required? etc. etc.

Nody

Patser wrote: »

Those contingency plans, especially regarding road freight for 6 months, would again push the real impact of Brexit a further 6 months down the road.

And help Irish companies who need to transport goods to EU etc. In short; this is EU throwing Ireland under the buss again by trying to minimize the impact for EU countries such as Ireland of Brexit, damn those bureaucrats in EU and how they keep sacrificing Ireland on the altar of Brexit for the greater good!

Enzokk

Seems like the French are standing strong on some of the sticking points, so no deal then unless Johnson caves,

https://twitter.com/tconnellyRTE/status/1336984531031691266?s=20

https://twitter.com/tconnellyRTE/status/1336984534320111619?s=20

The French doesn't want compromise on LPF and fishing rights.

paul71

Enzokk wrote: »

The UK will find out quickly that they are entering into a world they have not really been aware of as part of the EU. A lot of work was done by the EU and they are going to have to learn quickly and on the job.

https://twitter.com/JJHTweets/status/1336940018909270016?s=20

Basically they announced they weren't going to collect tariffs agreed by the WTO against the US in the Boeing dispute. The US welcomed the decision, but also points out they have no legal standing to collect tariffs even if they wanted to. The US by the way will still collect tariffs as they not only included the EU but also the UK along with France, Germany and Spain in the action. So the UK leaving the EU has no effect and tariffs can and will be collected against the UK.

Homework is not a thing at Eton or Harrow because you don't go home. That is just sheer incompetence.

Nody

Enzokk wrote: »

The French doesn't want compromise on LPF and fishing rights.

I'd guess you'd struggle to find any country in EU that would compromise on LPF as that's literally cutting out the legs of the single market if allowed. France did also state they were ready to compromise on fishing in that statement but they insisted on access to UK waters as a baseline for the negotiation.

As a side note Tesco warned of a 5% price hike, of course Dominic thinks that's nothing to worry about...

Dominic Raab has dismissed supermarket warnings of food price hikes and potential shortages if there is a no-deal Brexit as “bumps along the road”.

Tesco has predicted average rises of 5 per cent – with much bigger increases feared on some meats – and is stockpiling non-fresh food, to prepare for disruptions to supplies.

But Mr Raab said he was “not concerned” about the impact on shoppers, arguing higher tariffs were “a very minor proportion of what goes into food prices” and 50 per cent of supplies were domestic.

Any price hikes would be “very much at the margin” and other future free trade deals would create “opportunities in other areas to reduce food prices over the medium term”, the Foreign Secretary argued.

This is the stuff that I think will really be a grass annoyance of Brexit which will sharpen people's opinion and complain quite a bit.

Lumen

These contingency measures just look like can-kicking to me.

This is hopeless.

paul71

Lumen wrote: »

These contingency measures just look like can-kicking to me.

This is hopeless.

Not really, those measures are the bare minimum, they do nothing about the core no-deal.

Tariffs will come in with effect from day 1 if no deal, that does not need to be resolved for life to go on. But planes need to keep flying, and trucks need to cross borders irrespective of any tariffs on goods carried in them.

Snickers Man

Enzokk wrote: »

Basically they [the UK] announced they weren't going to collect tariffs agreed by the WTO against the US in the Boeing dispute. The US welcomed the decision, but also points out they have no legal standing to collect tariffs even if they wanted to. The US by the way will still collect tariffs as they not only included the EU but also the UK along with France, Germany and Spain in the action. So the UK leaving the EU has no effect and tariffs can and will be collected against the UK.

Like the man said in his tweet: "It's almost as if the UK don't have a clue what they're doing" :D

On another note: Sammy Wilson of the DUP was most upset at the agreement reached on the Northern Ireland Protocol. Speaking last Tuesday in the House of Commons, he sneered at the cosmopolitan background of one of his colleagues and said:
"I note that the ..[Anthony Browne MP]..talked of being part French, part Norwegian and part Irish—he had other bits as well that I did not quite pick up. Can I assure him that I am 100% British and want to remain 100% British?"

What sort of person claims to be 100% British? Have we heard this before?

Well yes. Back in the 1950s Britain tried to hold on to some of its central African colonies by forming the Federation of Rhodesia and Nyasaland. It was a combination of the three countries now known as Zimbabwe (Southern Rhodesia), Zambia (Northern Rhodesia) and Malawi (Nyasaland).

Three existing parliaments/administrative councils would have an additional layer of government superimposed over then in the form of a multinational federal government. Yet each of the four executives would be the responsibility of different civil service bureaucracies in London. Some would come under the Commonwealth Office, others the Colonial Office, resulting in a conflicting and confused mess. (Aside: could the way they ballsed this up be the basis of Britain's inherent mistrust of supranational decision-making bodies like the EU Commision, Council et al? But I digress)

Anyway, the second prime minister of the Federation was a political bruiser, and former heavyweight boxer called Roy Welensky. Born in Salisbury/(Harare) to a Lithuanian Jewish father and Afrikaner mother he famously described himself as "50% Jewish, 50% Afrikaner and 100% British". He wasn't at all.

How "British" Sammy Wilson is considered to be by his "compatriots" might be gleaned by his famous interview with Ali G (Sacha Baron Cohen in his pre-Borat days). Speaking in his Belfast office he told Ali "I'm not Irish, I'm British".
To which Ali replied "So, is you here on holiday then?"

Incidentally, Welensky's predecessor as Federal Prime Minister was very candid about the nature of the "partnership" the Federation had promised to its African representatives. "It's going to be like the partnership between a rider and his horse," he said. Unwritten subtext: We're the rider; you're the horse; only one of us gets to hold the whip.

Portents aren't good for you, Sammy

jimmycrackcorm

Strazdas wrote: »

The whole British sovereignty argument is a very strange thing. It seems to be firmly rooted in xenophobia and toxic right wing English nationalism. Why would a country which has been independent for over 1000 years and hasn't been invaded for centuries be overly bothered about how 'sovereign' it is?

It's not about that. It's about reminding the rest of Europe that "We won the war!".

That's why the UK is the only country who has wanted to get out.
It's the same rationale that makes brits living in Spain and France Ex-Pats, but the Spanish and French in the UK are immigrants.

trellheim

So three choices

1) Deal
2) No-Deal
3) Can-Kick

No-one wants (2), (1) is looking impossible so why not delay and forestall

ancapailldorcha

trellheim wrote: »

So three choices

1) Deal
2) No-Deal
3) Can-Kick

No-one wants (2), (1) is looking impossible so why not delay and forestall

They can only delay for a few weeks and that's it. I think both sides want a deal but the British side are still insisting on playing brinkmanship so the only remedy is patience.

Seth Brundle

Sam Russell wrote: »

As an aside, what happens to UK registered cars in Ireland after the 1st Jan 2001 or the end of the above? Will NI registered vehicles be treated differently? Will the Gardai have access to the UK vehicle and driver databases? Will green cards be required? etc. etc.

https://www.revenue.ie/en/customs-traders-and-agents/brexit/information-for-businesses/vrt-implications-of-trade-with-the-uk/vrt-implications-of-importing-cars-from-the-uk.aspx

In terms of the different agencies sharing databases - this is very doubtful to my knowledge.

Infini

Lumen wrote: »

These contingency measures just look like can-kicking to me.

This is hopeless.

Should also be said that these are only to prevent severe IMMEDIATE disruption to these area's come Jan 1st. It should also be noted that these are conditional on the UK not playing games as if they do these would be changed at extremely short notice by the EU. Basically if there's disruption it will be because the UK triggered it.

looksee

The UK said they did not want an extension, so the EU have given them one.

CelticRambler

Seth Brundle wrote: »

https://www.revenue.ie/en/customs-traders-and-agents/brexit/information-for-businesses/vrt-implications-of-trade-with-the-uk/vrt-implications-of-importing-cars-from-the-uk.aspx

In terms of the different agencies sharing databases - this is very doubtful to my knowledge.

In the detail of the NI Protocol, there was mention of export declarations no longer being needed because the relevant data can be extracted from existing declarations in respect of Irish Sea crossings. It's not beyond the realms of possibility that the mining of that data will scoop up "temporary" importations that never left the island. I have a suspicion that the much trumpeted "technological solution" to the border problem will shine a light on private movements that were somewhat grey until now. Should any future government decide that the country's coffers needed a boost, they might find it tempting to ensure all outstanding duties are paid in full ...

cml387

looksee wrote: »

The UK said they did not want an extension, so the EU have given them one.

This is not an extension. It is the minimum necessary to reduce the shock of an abrupt departure to the EU economies.

tanko

trellheim wrote: »

So three choices

1) Deal
2) No-Deal
3) Can-Kick

No-one wants (2), (1) is looking impossible so why not delay and forestall

The latest spiel is for 6 or 12 month extensions to the existing arrangements for the likes of air travel and fishing.
The only realistic outcome to this mess was always going to be some kind of BRINO and that's what we are going to end up with.
They're leaving but they're not leaving. The more things change the more they stay the same.

Snickers Man

jimmycrackcorm wrote: »

It's not about that. It's about reminding the rest of Europe that "We won the war!".

Nail on the head!

There are many different reasons for people voting for Brexit. I am sure the motivations of people in "Red Wall" constituencies in the North of England are very different to those from the affluent south whose poster boys are the likes of Jacob Rees Mogg, Peter Bone, Bill Cash and Boris.

But the single most pervasive motivation for Brexit, cutting across all classes in Britain, is seething resentment at the fanciful notion they have deluded themselves with for 75 years that "we won the war" has to be contrasted with the self-evident truth that Germany won the peace.

Wer hat dem Frieden gewonnen, Basil?

jimmycrackcorm

Snickers Man wrote: »

Nail on the head!

There are many different reasons for people voting for Brexit. I am sure the motivations of people in "Red Wall" constituencies in the North of England are very different to those from the affluent south whose poster boys are the likes of Jacob Rees Mogg, Peter Bone, Bill Cash and Boris.

But the single most pervasive motivation for Brexit, cutting across all classes in Britain, is seething resentment at the fanciful notion they have deluded themselves with for 75 years that "we won the war" has to be contrasted with the self-evident truth that Germany won the peace.

Wer hat dem Frieden gewonnen, Basil?

There's also a complete denial that it was actually the Americans and in particular the Russians that actually won it.

storker

Snickers Man wrote: »

But the single most pervasive motivation for Brexit, cutting across all classes in Britain, is seething resentment at the fanciful notion they have deluded themselves with for 75 years that "we won the war" has to be contrasted with the self-evident truth that Germany won the peace.

You have to love how freely they use the word "We", when hardly anyone who helped do the winning is still alive...

That's the state of the UK mindset. Puffing out its chest thinking it's marvellous based on the achievements of dead men. What a bunch of losers.

storker

jimmycrackcorm wrote: »

There's also a complete denial that it was actually the Americans and in particular the Russians that actually won it.

To be fair, they did carry out a crucial role, and at least they weren't cuddling up to the Nazis and helping with the carve-up of Poland like some we could mention.

ambro25

looksee wrote: »

The UK said they did not want an extension, so the EU have given them one.

The EU are unilaterally keeping the lights on in the UK, on its behalf and so long as it behaves.

These measures are no different to the unilateral measures previously announced in ready-to-roll form, on every previous no-deal cliff edge in 2018 and 2019. Not new or a surprise what-so-ever.

This time around, however, there is no get-out-of-jail extension mechanism left to reach or invoke. So, they are getting noticed at long last.

If the UK should decide to **** its pants and throw a tantrum, well...it is its sovereign right to do so. There's only so much you can ever do for people who refuse to help themselves.

listermint

looksee wrote: »

The UK said they did not want an extension, so the EU have given them one.

You are wrong

The EU said they would do this all the way back in 2019

This isn't an extension its the EU looking after EU interests for a period of time.

It's not an extension

54and56

trellheim wrote: »

So three choices

1) Deal
2) No-Deal
3) Can-Kick

No-one wants (2), (1) is looking impossible so why not delay and forestall

I think #3 (the 6 month easements granted by the EU) are primarily designed to do two things:-

1. Confirm that the EU is the mature heavyweight in the relationship i.e. they can offer the UK access to the EU not the other way around as that would look completely ridiculous.

2. It'll give the UK a good taste of what life is going to be like with tariffs and customs and no access to EU negotiated trade deals around the world etc. If that doesn't motivate the UK govt to reassess the value of their hard-line stance on sovereignty and provide them with a ladder to climb down on nothing will.

Queue 6 months of headiness about the battle of Britain spirit etc etc

MICKEYG

jimmycrackcorm wrote: »

It's not about that. It's about reminding the rest of Europe that "We won the war!".

That's why the UK is the only country who has wanted to get out.
It's the same rationale that makes brits living in Spain and France Ex-Pats, but the Spanish and French in the UK are immigrants.

They need to be told
that they "were on the winning side in the war but they did not win it". The Russians won the war. With no eastern front I can't see how the US and Britain could have invaded and pushed the German army back to Berlin. With the eastern front, it was American troops, equipment and supplies that enabled the invasions of North Africa, Italy and France.
I don't think any British army would have been able to withstand the Wehrmacht on its own.

I am of course glad the Nazis were defeated, but I am very tired of the UK posturing and referencing back to it.
I have always been made to feel welcome over in the UK and I would hate to see the peope I know suffer but part of me thinks a hard Brexit, and it's consequences, are what they need to move forward as a nation.

peter kern

listermint wrote: »

You are wrong

The EU said they would do this all the way back in 2019

This isn't an extension its the EU looking after EU interests for a period of time.

It's not an extension

what most angry people on this thread forget there is no winner in this .
pretty much everybody is going to lose ,some more some less almost everybody is losing something , freedom of movement money,world influence.