Brexit discussion thread XIII (Please read OP before posting)

breezy1985

Sam Russell wrote: »

Not a word on RTE today about the Brexit negotiations, nor about the midnight deadline. Nothing.

No mention of the European Parliament tweet saying there would be no ratification of any deal this year. Nothing.

I wonder why?

Why? Do tell cause I can't think of a reason

Sam Russell

Sam Russell wrote: »

Not a word on RTE today about the Brexit negotiations, nor about the midnight deadline. Nothing.

No mention of the European Parliament tweet saying there would be no ratification of any deal this year. Nothing.

I wonder why?

COVID(v2.1) has taken centre stage with dramatic travel bans and border closures, most people really don't care that yet another "deadline/last chance" has passed without agreement.

CelticRambler

murphaph wrote: »

The Swiss and EU checks at the land border are much more random in nature. You might get stopped but you probably won't. I haven't crossed the land border more than a dozen times so my sample size is small but I've never been checked since CH joined Schengen, even though one thing has theoretically nothing to do with the other.

mrunsure wrote: »

I have crossed the Swiss border several times by car and by train. Before Schengen you would always be checked at a major border crossing but there were a vast number of minor crossings which were often unmanned. Since Schengen I've only been checked towards Italy by Italians at the Chiasso border, who asked me if I was carrying more than 10,000 euros.

I've crossed the Swiss-EU border dozens of times a year for the last number of years and, as a private vehicle, never been stopped. On the contrary, on a few occasions when there have been customs agents standing by the post, I've been waved through. On the other hand, I've met people - usually driving Swiss cars - who've been stopped at the same crossing hours (or minutes) before me.

The last item of value that I imported from Switzerland was a musical instrument, bought in a charity shop, and carried back to France in the boot of my car. The last time I enjoyed a random customs check anywhere on the continent was right in the middle of France, about 150km from home on a 600km journey. The number of times I've been stopped and had my campervan physically inspected (and x-rayed :eek: ) on the Folkestone-Calais crossing (pre-Brexit!) outweighs all of my other interactions with customs, anywhere in the world, ever in my life, by about 5 to one!

Brussels Sprout

breezy1985 wrote: »

But under PR a Tory & Ukip coalition would have probably happened at some stage and we would still be here anyway

I don't think so. The election method that was proposed in the 2011 referendum was to stick with single-seat constituencies but have people rank their choices so that transfers would be used to get a candidate to 50%. That is a system that rewards centrist candidates.

UKIP were a very polarising party - running to the right of the Tories. To get anyone elected in that system they would need to outpoll their local Tory candidate and hope that their transfers would get them to 50%. I don't think that was a likely prospect for very many UKIP candidates. Instead they would likely be getting eliminated and having their transfers elect Tories.

Instead, for them to get any representation they would either need a multi-seat constituency system (like we have in Ireland) or some kind of list system - neither of which were on the table.

joeysoap

I have cousins living in Switzerland ( Basel) who do their shopping in France and who stop at customs in Switzerland to get their receipts ‘stamped’ for a vat return or something like that ( I was only half listening)

fly_agaric

rock22 wrote: »

While no one could foresee that a new strain of Covid might arise,

I'm no biologist...but I have a laymans understanding of evolution/mutations. This new virus has been allowed to run through 10s of millions of hosts around Europe due to government incompetence/weakness/ideological blinkers + foolishness and selfishness of the general public. That is risky. Throw enough darts and eventually you will score some points.

rock22 wrote: »

it was always likely that the landbridge would be massive affected by delays. Surely we in Ireland should have been much more proactive in planning direct ferries to France. Instead, Irish ferries sold the Oscar Wilde which could have provided extra capacity.

I've thought all along there is a bit of a failure of imagination in Irish government & many Irish people (presumably many business people as well). They've always believed that the British govt. can't really be this nuts. Something, some fudge or other will come and save the day at the last minute. Getting ready for the very worst case (no agreement at end of transition period, what we were told would not happen) was extremely costly & awkward seen as a total waste if it doesn't happen so they've likely been caught with their pants down a bit now IMO.

Widdensushi

I see the Scottish seafood association is demanding compensation for fish that is on it's way to the continent and caught up in the delays, transport ban. While I feel for everyone involved, drivers, people who might have a months work stuck in a lorry perishing, I find it a bit ironic how much they have been taking for granted, they seem oblivious to the difficulties that are ahead, with or without covid.

Sam Russell

Brussels Sprout wrote: »

I don't think so. The election method that was proposed in the 2011 referendum was to stick with single-seat constituencies but have people rank their choices so that transfers would be used to get a candidate to 50%. That is a system that rewards centrist candidates.

I thought (and I may well be wrong) that the proposal was for an 'alternative vote' which would suggest that the voter selected 1 and 2 on the ballot and no more. So no voting down the card - making your vote work for you. So just 1 or 2 would not be a good system if there were, say, 4 parties running with a possibility of success. I could see Labour, Tory, LibDem, and say Plaid or SNP, or say a right wing English Nationalist. The restriction to 1 or 2 is insufficient, as STV allows one to vote 'against' the one you do not want.

The referendum on this was a farce - deliberately hobbled by Cameron.

Brussels Sprout

Sam Russell wrote: »

I thought (and I may well be wrong) that the proposal was for an 'alternative vote' which would suggest that the voter selected 1 and 2 on the ballot and no more. So no voting down the card - making your vote work for you. So just 1 or 2 would not be a good system if there were, say, 4 parties running with a possibility of success. I could see Labour, Tory, LibDem, and say Plaid or SNP, or say a right wing English Nationalist. The restriction to 1 or 2 is insufficient, as STV allows one to vote 'against' the one you do not want.

The referendum on this was a farce - deliberately hobbled by Cameron.

You made me a bit unsure myself. I had a look at the wikipedia page for that referendum and it links to this as the system that was proposed - which used the Irish Presidential election as an example so I'd say it's rank them all alright. Just 1 & 2 would be awful.

Shelga

I see ardent remainers Alastair Campbell, Nicola Sturgeon, Anna Soubry and more are on Twitter, calling for an extension.

Are they for real? With 10 days to go? Why are they asking for something that cannot be granted, and why do they assume that if the UK wants something, it will be so?

The chance for an extension was July. They know right well that that opportunity has passed. Time to buckle up.

View

Shelga wrote: »

I see ardent remainers Alastair Campbell, Nicola Sturgeon, Anna Soubry and more are on Twitter, calling for an extension.

Are they for real? With 10 days to go? Why are they asking for something that cannot be granted, and why do they assume that if the UK wants something, it will be so?

The chance for an extension was July. They know right well that that opportunity has passed. Time to buckle up.

Politics.

They call for it. The government rejects it. The general public then in theory blames the government for any subsequent mess since they refused to request an extension.

yagan

CelticRambler wrote: »

Yes, but that's all part and parcel of the systematic disenfranchisement created by FPTP.

The MEP elections weren't FPTP.

peter kern

correct horse battery staple wrote: »

33 billion wiped on stock market https://www.independent.co.uk/news/business/ftse-100-drop-covid-travel-ban-no-deal-brexit-b1776965.html

How long before panic buying sets in making the COVID/brexit Xmas worse

unless the dax had gone up 3 % rather than losing almost the same % as the ftse , i am not sure what information we get from this.

tanko

Shelga wrote: »

I see ardent remainers Alastair Campbell, Nicola Sturgeon, Anna Soubry and more are on Twitter, calling for an extension.

Are they for real? With 10 days to go? Why are they asking for something that cannot be granted, and why do they assume that if the UK wants something, it will be so?

The chance for an extension was July. They know right well that that opportunity has passed. Time to buckle up.

Some sort of a fudge and a bit more can kicking is the most likely outcome now.
The timing of the appearance of this new Covid strain is very convenient for Boris, it will give him the cover for his inevitable cave in.

MrMusician18

Shelga wrote: »

I see ardent remainers Alastair Campbell, Nicola Sturgeon, Anna Soubry and more are on Twitter, calling for an extension.

Are they for real? With 10 days to go? Why are they asking for something that cannot be granted, and why do they assume that if the UK wants something, it will be so?

The chance for an extension was July. They know right well that that opportunity has passed. Time to buckle up.

Why can't an extension be granted? There is no fundamental law of nature preventing an extension from being granted

Nody

MrMusician18 wrote: »

Why can't an extension be granted? There is no fundamental law of nature preventing an extension from being granted

There is; the Withdrawal Agreement signed by EU and UK. It allowed for an extension of up to 2 years but that extension had to be requested by UK at least six months before the deadline. The full legal text is here; what you want is from page 59, article 126 confirming the date and article 132, page 63 for the details of potential extension confirming the deadline for the extension decision to be taken before 1st July 2020 for either a 1 or 2 year extension.

Silent Running

MrMusician18 wrote: »

Why can't an extension be granted? There is no fundamental law of nature preventing an extension from being granted

Didn't the UK parliament make it illegal to request an extension?

listermint

There should be no extension. This has to end, abruptly.

They can then kick the Tories out and take trade seriously.


Game over!!

CelticRambler

yagan wrote: »

The MEP elections weren't FPTP.

No, but when you've lived your whole voting life in a system where your one vote will be discarded if it's for the wrong party, it's easy to opt out of voting for a parliament you've been told (over and over again) is undemocratic and far removed from your daily life.

ArmaniJeanss

MrMusician18 wrote: »

Why can't an extension be granted? There is no fundamental law of nature preventing an extension from being granted

No laws of nature, but actual laws make it problematic.
It would need legislation in parliaments which aren't planning to sit again.
It might technically be a treaty change (as it goes against the procedure agreed in previous treaties) which would be an issue in Ireland in particular where everything has to be examined in detail by the AG to see if it requires a referendum.

Or maybe everyone agrees to turn a blind eye.

Nody

Silent Running wrote: »

Didn't the UK parliament make it illegal to request an extension?

The UK parliament is sovereign; they can change what ever laws is required to make it legal again. The problem is EU can not, and will not, allow an extension because unlike UK they actually live up to the commitments of international treaties that they sign up to. Hence the warning that UK may have to live with days to weeks of no deal Brexit before a deal can actually be ratified even if it's completed this side of the new year.

An Ciarraioch

Some positive news at least - it seems Gibraltar could be included within Schengen by Jan 1st:

https://english.elpais.com/brexit/2020-12-21/spain-and-uk-in-last-ditch-talks-to-bring-gibraltar-into-schengen-area.html

Silent Running

Nody wrote: »

The UK parliament is sovereign; they can change what ever laws is required to make it legal again. The problem is EU can not, and will not, allow an extension because unlike UK they actually live up to the commitments of international treaties that they sign up to. Hence the warning that UK may have to live with days to weeks of no deal Brexit before a deal can actually be ratified even if it's completed this side of the new year.

Yes, but that would take time, and time is in very short supply at the moment.

Nody

Silent Running wrote: »

Yes, but that would take time, and time is in very short supply at the moment.

I'd expect negotiations will be ongoing up to New years eve basically and continue afterwards if needed; hence the time is in theory close to unlimited. However what ever deal is agreed will not be ratified in time for Jan 1st 2021 and the only question then becomes how long the no deal brexit period will be.

An Ciarraioch wrote: »

Some positive news at least - it seems Gibraltar could be included within Schengen by Jan 1st:

https://english.elpais.com/brexit/2020-12-21/spain-and-uk-in-last-ditch-talks-to-bring-gibraltar-into-schengen-area.html

The irony of this is not lost on me, Gibraltar which was not part of Schengen previously will now be included. This means they can cross to Spain without issue but UK visitors flying in would not be allowed in without stamping their passports and apply for a visa. I wonder if the UK gunboats are going to show up to protest again?

breezy1985

Nody wrote: »

I'd expect negotiations will be ongoing up to New years eve basically and continue afterwards if needed; hence the time is in theory close to unlimited. However what ever deal is agreed will not be ratified in time for Jan 1st 2021 and the only question then becomes how long the no deal brexit period will be.

The irony of this is not lost on me, Gibraltar which was not part of Schengen previously will now be included. This means they can cross to Spain without issue but UK visitors flying in would not be allowed in without stamping their passports and apply for a visa. I wonder if the UK gunboats are going to show up to protest again?

Gibraltar is like Belfast most English people don't know is part of the UK or that it even exists

joeysoap

MrMusician18 wrote: »

Why can't an extension be granted? There is no fundamental law of nature preventing an extension from being granted

Do they really want one?

https://www.rte.ie/news/brexit/2020/1221/1185707-brexit-trade-talks/

MrMusician18

Nody wrote: »

There is; the Withdrawal Agreement signed by EU and UK. It allowed for an extension of up to 2 years but that extension had to be requested by UK at least six months before the deadline. The full legal text is here; what you want is from page 59, article 126 confirming the date and article 132, page 63 for the details of potential extension confirming the deadline for the extension decision to be taken before 1st July 2020 for either a 1 or 2 year extension.

It's not a law of nature, so this law can be changed. If everyone agrees, the clock could be "stopped". The force majeure circumstances of covid would certainly allow for it.

So of course there could be an extension, all human made deadlines are artificial. The only deadlines that are real are those driven by natural or physical processes. The only problem is getting everyone to agree to it.

Nody

MrMusician18 wrote: »

It's not a law of nature, so this law can be changed. If everyone agrees, the clock could be "stopped". The force majeure circumstances of covid would certainly allow for it.

So of course there could be an extension, all human made deadlines are artificial. The only deadlines that are real are those driven by natural or physical processes. The only problem is getting everyone to agree to it.

There are no deadlines driven by nature and this is an international treaty that was signed by both parties. The covid issue was well known long before the deadline and UK did not seek an extension. Therefor there is no force majeure that can then be claimed because it was not an unknown event. This is beyond the fact that as international treaty signed and sealed it would require a completely new treaty to be signed instead which there is no time to get ratified by all 27 countries as required by (oh irony) the sovereign laws for each respective country.

kalych

MrMusician18 wrote: »

It's not a law of nature, so this law can be changed. If everyone agrees, the clock could be "stopped". The force majeure circumstances of covid would certainly allow for it.

So of course there could be an extension, all human made deadlines are artificial. The only deadlines that are real are those driven by natural or physical processes. The only problem is getting everyone to agree to it.

By this logic there's no point in preparation for ANY deadline. Sure what's the point in studying for the leaving cert. Isn't it only an artificial deadline that can easily be changed if we all agreed on it? Or for example the financial year end for a company. No point is preparing the year-end report as the deadline is purely artificial.

At some point in life childish excuses have to make way for realities of life, which are: sooner or later we all have to either do the work or face the consequences of our procrastination and the UK is long overdue in presenting a realistic proposal for a deal.

MrMusician18

Nody wrote: »

There are no deadlines driven by nature and this is an international treaty that was signed by both parties. The covid issue was well known long before the deadline and UK did not seek an extension. Therefor there is no force majeure that can then be claimed because it was not an unknown event. This is beyond the fact that as international treaty signed and sealed it would require a completely new treaty to be signed instead which there is no time to get ratified by all 27 countries as required by (oh irony) the sovereign laws for each respective country.

The covid variant and response from Europe last night/this morning would certainly be considered force majeure. Then again there is politics in that too. The banning of accompanied freight from the UK by France is political and designed to make a point. It's not like the French government don't have form for using a natural disaster to make a point see the French driven ban on british beef long after BSE was under control.

The clock can of course be stopped. Existing arrangements can be put into place provisionally in the absence of a deal (just like they are proposing to implement the new deal, if it's agreed by the negotiators before 1st Jan). There are many ways around this artificial deadline if the will is there on both sides for it.

This is a political trade agreement, not a volcano on a hair trigger. Of course it can be postponed. As I said, they're just needs to be the will on both sides which sadly looks absent.