Brexit discussion thread XIII (Please read OP before posting)

ExMachina1000

54and56 wrote: »

Nope, it hasn't been confirmed it's 16 billion per year, just that it's worth 16 billion. That could be over many years.

You need to sell a lot of English cheese, English sparkling wine and Welsh lamb to get to 16 billion and that's without netting off the coast to HMRC of the reduction in tariffs fur Japanese car parts the UK had to give up in order to get some sort of deal to limp across the line.

They only need 100 and a half so

Capt'n Midnight

Brexit is a slow motion car crash and there's going to be more talk about leaving the union and sovereignty and will of the people and taking back control and cold hard economics.

Here's a new plot arc.
Shetland Islands Council has overwhelmingly voted to start looking at ways to become financially and politically independent from Scotland.

Independence from Scotland , or Independent entirely from the UK ?
They must have considered the UK trade deal with the Faroe Islands.


RTE overview of Shetlands from 2017
https://www.rte.ie/news/special-reports/2017/0216/853044-shetland-brexit-scotland/

Of all the ramifications of the Brexit vote, the fate of the Shetland Islands in the North Atlantic and their oil fields and fisheries may not top the list for negotiators in London and Brussels.
...
Scotland has around 60% of the EU's oil reserves and the second-largest volume of proven natural gas reserves, most of it located around Shetland.

The islands also land more fish than ports in England, Wales and Northern Ireland combined.

A Dub in Glasgo

Capt'n Midnight wrote: »

Brexit is a slow motion car crash and there's going to be more talk about leaving the union and sovereignty and will of the people and taking back control and cold hard economics.

Here's a new plot arc.
Shetland Islands Council has overwhelmingly voted to start looking at ways to become financially and politically independent from Scotland.

Independence from Scotland , or Independent entirely from the UK ?
They must have considered the UK trade deal with the Faroe Islands.


RTE overview of Shetlands from 2017
https://www.rte.ie/news/special-reports/2017/0216/853044-shetland-brexit-scotland/

The story about the Shetlands is extraordinary! The whole UK apparatus has ignored the polling in Scotland over the last 6 months and then they jump on one vote in the council that says they wish to discuss de-centralising power. Desparate stuff from the British Nationalists

Geuze

CelticRambler wrote: »

With reference to Brexit being the domino that would destroy the European project, it's interesting to note that the EU's favourite currency is currently trading very favourably against the British Pound, the US Dollar, the Swiss Franc, the Japanese Yen ...

The euro is up a bit against USD and CHF, but still well below where it was, say, ten years ago.

https://www.ecb.europa.eu/stats/policy_and_exchange_rates/euro_reference_exchange_rates/html/index.en.html

Enzokk

Johnson is really ramping up the lies,

Johnson was given warnings on effect of Irish protocol

The UK government was explicitly warned in January that Boris Johnson’s Brexit divorce deal would leave Brussels able to claim jurisdiction over “large amounts” of UK state aid policy after the end of the transition period, documents seen by the Financial Times have revealed.

A 10-page official briefing document shows the civil service issued clear warnings that Mr Johnson’s deal to avoid the return of a trade border in Ireland would impact not just subsidy decisions relating to Northern Ireland but could also “reach back” into the rest of the UK.

The briefing document, marked “official sensitive”, shows that ministers were told about the onerous state aid provisions within the withdrawal agreement relating to Northern Ireland, which they moved to legally override with the internal market bill. The move brought EU-UK trade talks to a standstill, with the EU issuing an ultimatum to the government to withdraw its legislation by the end of the month.

This article is in response to a meeting Johnson had with Tory MPs to try and explain to them why they need to vote for the UK to break international law,

https://twitter.com/PaulBrandITV/status/1304460640652800001?s=20

https://twitter.com/PaulBrandITV/status/1304461233266012162?s=20

https://twitter.com/PaulBrandITV/status/1304464870491009025?s=20

https://twitter.com/PaulBrandITV/status/1304468687781494784?s=20

So in summary, the UK PM negotiated a deal with the EU and changed to a position that the previous PM said no UK PM would ever agree to. He then whipped his MPs to vote for his deal and when they didn't he chucked them out of the party.

He was able to get a new election and ran on the platform that his negotiated deal was "oven-ready" for Brexit and he won a massive majority on the back of this lie. Now he for some reason wants to go back on his own agreed deal and ignore the treaty he signed and parliament voted for.

David Allan Green made the observation that Johnson of 2020 would have been chucked out of the Conservative Party by Johnson of 2019. That is where we are, a joke of a PM not happy with the bill he agreed to pay.

Spleodar

It's also possible he just has an irrational hatred of the EU. It would appear that way from all of his writing going way back to the days when he was one of the main producers of Euromyths.

I quite honestly don't think we are going to get a rational outcome from this. It's pure tabloid headlines on the White Cliffs of Dover stuff.

You're talking about a government that turned down both cooperative assistance with ventilators and vaccines during a pandemic.

fash

ExMachina1000 wrote: »

The UK signed a new deal with Japan increasing trade by almost 16 billion pounds per year.

They only need another 100 of these

... Or puts in an exact stand still as compared to remaining in the EU and enjoying the EU-JPN deal.

fash

Spleodar wrote: »

It's also possible he just has an irrational hatred of the EU. It would appear that way from all of his writing going way back to the days when he was one of the main producers of Euromyths.

I quite honestly don't think we are going to get a rational outcome from this. It's pure tabloid headlines on the White Cliffs of Dover stuff.

You're talking about a government that turned down both cooperative assistance with ventilators and vaccines during a pandemic.

Indeed- you can also see the direction of travel the UK government will be taking in relation to their positioning on the Scottish referendum and their (inevitable) breaking of the Good Friday Agreement: "foreign powers trying to break us- don't allow it" etc.

Enzokk

Spleodar wrote: »

It's also possible he just has an irrational hatred of the EU. It would appear that way from all of his writing going way back to the days when he was one of the main producers of Euromyths.

I quite honestly don't think we are going to get a rational outcome from this. It's pure tabloid headlines on the White Cliffs of Dover stuff.

You're talking about a government that turned down both cooperative assistance with ventilators and vaccines during a pandemic.

When commentators and journalists were saying that he would eventually settle for a deal because he is not as Eurosceptic as he campaigned, they seemed to forget his time in Brussels. Either he was just having a laugh or he wanted to hurt the EU and either explanation makes him unfit for office. If he believed it, look where we are now. If he was just having a laugh, then why continue the act?

I do think he is more Eurosceptic than his friends and colleagues think he is. This is probably because he is a funny and likeable person and they don't want to really think he is not really like them when it comes to beliefs about the EU and the UK's place in the world. But I also think we are in a perfect storm now as well.

Usually when there is a aircraft accident people refer to the Swiss cheese model, where a confluence of events leads to the accident. Take out one and the accident doesn't happen. When people look back they will refer to this, a Eurosceptic PM who only has eyes on the big job and who saw his way to that job through Brexit. Through this he attracted a bunch of repulsive people to work with him and they are the real problem. The likes of Gove and Cummings and Frost are much more partisan and ideological when compared to Johnson and they are in positions of power right now. They are helping push Johnson to the current position, but he is a willing puppet for them. He has his own dislike for the EU and he got the job he wanted from it. Perfect storm of events.

CelticRambler

Enzokk wrote: »

So in summary, the UK PM negotiated a deal with the EU and changed to a position that the previous PM said no UK PM would ever agree to. He then whipped his MPs to vote for his deal and when they didn't he chucked them out of the party.

He was able to get a new election and ran on the platform that his negotiated deal was "oven-ready" for Brexit and he won a massive majority on the back of this lie. Now he for some reason wants to go back on his own agreed deal and ignore the treaty he signed and parliament voted for.

There's also that nice phrase at the end: "no time for questions" - a fitting way to close the parenthesis opened with the stifled debate on the WA last year. Mind you, is there anything to be gained in asking questions when you know you'll receive only a stream of lies as a response?

OscarMIlde

listermint wrote: »

I've said it before. The ERG needs a serious criminal investigation. They aren't a bunch of like minded civic Tory MPs. There is sinister connections and money swilling around there. This is about disaster capitalism and continuing on the worldwide tax evasion through off shore crown territories.

They want no deal they want to continue and increase the money train. Their connections go deep. None of this benefits the country.

The Guardian had an excellent article regarding their funding sources. It really clarified the intent behind their actions for me.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/nov/29/rightwing-thinktank-conservative-boris-johnson-brexit-atlas-network

Capt'n Midnight

Yesterday the UK took another small step closer to a possible bereakup

Capt'n Midnight wrote: »

Shetland Islands Council has overwhelmingly voted to start looking at ways to become financially and politically independent from Scotland.

Today he's playing the Priti Patel 'starve the Irish' card
Johnson warns Brussels could 'carve up' the UK

Writing in the Telegraph, Mr Johnson said the EU would use an "extreme interpretation" of the Northern Ireland Protocol to impose "a full-scale trade border down the Irish sea" that could stop the transport of food from Britain to Northern Ireland.

Rain Ascending

There is going to be a lot of noise from the UK government about how the EU is going to prevent this or that. Today's headline from the Telegraph is a good example:

Link

As per usual, 95% of the statements will be complete bluster that are going to take a lot of work to counter. In many cases, the issue will be fought out with soundbites -- the most common reply will be "why did you happily sign the WA and recommend it to the UK electorate last year?" But, here on boards.ie, rest assured, we can go deeper .

For this one, I'd point to a Brexiter, albeit a EFTA/EEA supporter, Richard North. As I've said before, he's anti-EU (wrote a book about the EU called "the Great Deception"), was involved in various leave campaigns, rather predictable in his politics ("a plague on all your houses"), and doesn't understand how the media work ("why don't they spend their day doing primary research?"). BUT, he's excellent on regulation and its interaction with the real world and therefore worth keeping an eye on. For this case, he has a very clear explainer of all the questions and issues around the "food blockage" baloney from the UK government and needless to say, it is a complete destruction of the argument on several levels. See this link.

A quick summary:

• The UK government has failed to complete the basic application process needed for third country status for food imports into the EU. The EU asks of all countries, "What's your food safety regime?" Evidently, the UK hasn't yet provided enough information for the guys in Grange, home to the EU's Health and Food Audits and Analysis Office, to do the work.
• Even if the EU blocks GB food products from the EU and NI, the UK can use the "exceptional impact on society" clause in the Northern Ireland Protocol in the WA to unlock GB->NI food shipments.
• The bill the UK government is pushing through parliament doesn't say anything about GB->NI regulation. (I'm not so sure that North has this right -- he's right that Section 42 of the UK Internal Market Bill doesn't do it, but one would have to check the entire bill to be sure.)

BluePlanet

I suspect they are seeking piecemeal, bespoke, patchwork trade deals, that are unique to each sector and are trying to wreck the current paradigm to make it the only option.

Like, they'll come back and say: since we can't agree with the WA and a FTA, then we may as well try and lessen the trade disruption by agreeing a temporary arrangement for - fish, financial services, etc etc.

CelticRambler

Rain Ascending wrote: »

For this one, I'd point to a Brexiter, albeit a EFTA/EEA supporter, Richard North. .... See this link.

Contained within that article is a brief reference to the concept of third countries being listed or not. Brexiters (and the government) seem to be completely unaware of what this means, and how their current behaviour is setting them up for an almighty crash-out on January 1st.

When they talk about Canada-style or Australia-style FTAs, these are done on the basis of those countries being "listed" in respect of every area covered by the trade agreement and/or movement of people and animals. But to be "listed" the countries concerned have to provide copies of the standards and testing protocols that they have in place to justify being on the list.

To date, the Johnson-Cummings administration has demonstrated a pathological aversion to providing hard copy in respect of almost every aspect of government competence, so it doesn't take much to believe that the 1st of January will come and go with no sign of the required documentation. The EU has previously signalled that it would grandfather certain recognitions for a limited time while the UK got its act together, but this week's stupidity is about as clear a message to the EU as we're going to get that there are no standards that'll be adhered to.

Is there, then, any reason for the EU to grandfather recognition of quality control labs and other guarantors of the UK's compliance? I don't think so. From now till the end of the year, the EU doesn't have to do anything to create a hard Brexit - it need only kick the ball back to Johnson saying "You want an 'Australia'-type deal? Send us the paperwork" and not do anything to make Brexit softer.

fash

BluePlanet wrote: »

I suspect they are seeking piecemeal, bespoke, patchwork trade deals, that are unique to each sector and are trying to wreck the current paradigm to make it the only option.

Like, they'll come back and say: since we can't agree with the WA and a FTA, then we may as well try and lessen the trade disruption by agreeing a temporary arrangement for - fish, financial services, etc etc.

Which is why the EU parliament said unless the UK backs down on reneging on the WA, there will be no deals whatsoever.

BluePlanet

fash wrote: »

Which is why the EU parliament said unless the UK backs down on reneging on the WA, there will be no deals whatsoever.

Yes but that's probably bluffing?

PeadarCo

BluePlanet wrote: »

Yes but that's probably bluffing?

Probably not. Remember Brexit negotiations don't take place in a vacuum. What ever the UK and the EU decide has implications for every other trade deal post Brexit on both sides. The how is also very important as it will inform other parties on how to negotiate with the EU and UK. If the EU agrees a trade agreement with the UK after it unilaterally breaks the withdrawal agreement it sends a message to the US, China, Russia India etc when doing their own deals with the EU.

The EU probably will take some measures to extend certain things such as some mutual recognition of qualifications etc for a very limited amount of time in the event of no deal. But these will be do be benefit the EU and not the UK. And once the transaction phase is over they will be withdrawn.

54and56

BluePlanet wrote: »

Yes but that's probably bluffing?

I really don't think so. The EU takes a very patient, consistent and calm approach to international relations. It thinks things through, develops a consensus and then communicates it's position very clearly.

It cannot afford to play silly juvenile games like saying something and not meaning it or allowing itself to be blackmailed into accepting something it otherwise wouldn't. That would completely undermine its long term credibility and invite all kinds of similar behaviour from other nations it is currently dealing with or will deal with in future.

The best thing the EU (or any organisation or country) can do when faced with the type of provocative and untrustworthy behaviour currently being demonstrated by the UK is to respond in a very firm but rational manner such that no other country will ever have any doubts about how the EU will react if they try anything as crass.

volchitsa

BluePlanet wrote: »

Yes but that's probably bluffing?

Who do you think is bluffing, the EU or the UK? If the EU: why would you think that? And why would you think the UK are not?

Sam Russell

PeadarCo wrote: »

Probably not. Remember Brexit negotiations don't take place in a vacuum. What ever the UK and the EU decide has implications for every other trade deal post Brexit on both sides. The how is also very important as it will inform other parties on how to negotiate with the EU and UK. If the EU agrees a trade agreement with the UK after it unilaterally breaks the withdrawal agreement it sends a message to the US, China, Russia India etc when doing their own deals with the EU.

The EU probably will take some measures to extend certain things such as some mutual recognition of qualifications etc for a very limited amount of time in the event of no deal. But these will be do be benefit the EU and not the UK. And once the transaction phase is over they will be withdrawn.

What has always been clear since the Brexit stuff started is that the UK media assume their media is for domestic consumption only and no-one outside the UK will take notice.

What is clear is that the EU do read all the UK media and do take notice, and they listen to their ambassadors located in London, and listen to their member states concerns. Therefor nothing in the UK bubble goes unnoticed at EU level or at member state level.

It is for this reason that our DFA spent the last five years (since before the referendum) bending any ear they could find in the EU and in any member state about the effect that Brexit would have on NI and the border. And every ear listened.

It was a complete surprise to the British establishment that Ireland would be central to Brexit as far as the EU was concerned. They thought it would be the German car sales to the UK and the overall German auto industry that was the best lever to pull, and the German Chancellor would immediately call Ireland into line.

They still think that.

As for disrupting food movements from GB to NI - they are having a laugh - most of that is factory produced junk food we should not be eating anyway.

fash

volchitsa wrote: »

Who do you think is bluffing, the EU or the UK? If the EU: why would you think that? And why would you think the UK are not?

There is zero chance the EU is bluffing. The EU is an entity of the rule of law. If someone is disrespecting that in relation to the EU then the EU must put them in their place or else lose its standing and power in the world. This is now bigger than the UK or brexit - it is a question of what the EU stands for. The UK is going down.

BluePlanet

Why do we think the Tories are doing this?
I thought after the GE that Borris doesn't need the Unionists anymore to keep a majority in the HoC.

Shelga

BluePlanet wrote: »

Why do we think the Tories are doing this?
I thought after the GE that Borris doesn't need the Unionists anymore to keep a majority in the HoC.

I think because they want no deal, so they’re pretending to care about the union to give them cover.

I really don’t understand people like Michael Gove though. He doesn’t seem nearly as dumb as someone like Mark Francois. He must know how catastrophic no trade deal with the EU will be, for vast amounts of the population. Are people like him really so intent on enriching shadowy figures that they really don’t care about destabilising their own country like this? And they have the audacity to call Remainers traitors?

beggars_bush

Sam Russell wrote: »

What has always been clear since the Brexit stuff started is that the UK media assume their media is for domestic consumption only and no-one outside the UK will take notice.

What is clear is that the EU do read all the UK media and do take notice, and they listen to their ambassadors located in London, and listen to their member states concerns. Therefor nothing in the UK bubble goes unnoticed at EU level or at member state level.

It is for this reason that our DFA spent the last five years (since before the referendum) bending any ear they could find in the EU and in any member state about the effect that Brexit would have on NI and the border. And every ear listened.

It was a complete surprise to the British establishment that Ireland would be central to Brexit as far as the EU was concerned. They thought it would be the German car sales to the UK and the overall German auto industry that was the best lever to pull, and the German Chancellor would immediately call Ireland into line.

They still think that.

As for disrupting food movements from GB to NI - they are having a laugh - most of that is factory produced junk food we should not be eating anyway.

A lot of ingredients for food stuffs comes from the uk

fash

Shelga wrote: »

I think because they want no deal, so they’re pretending to care about the union to give them cover.

I really don’t understand people like Michael Gove though. He doesn’t seem nearly as dumb as someone like Mark Francois. He must know how catastrophic no trade deal with the EU will be, for vast amounts of the population. Are people like him really so intent on enriching shadowy figures that they really don’t care about destabilising their own country like this? And they have the audacity to call Remainers traitors?

I think that the first part is that any likely deal would be so anticlimatic and much of the immediate pain of brexit would happen anyway (because of UK implementation incompetence customs chaos and no recognition of food standards plus , no financial access, no truck drivers, at least partly selling out fishermen etc plus subject to EU rules (and don't forget UK has no idea what it intends to do so would be committing/ signing up blind to the EU rules) that no deal and blame the mean boys in the EU has an attraction.
They don't really care about the UK population (or "mushrooms" - kept in the dark and fed s**t) other than as a tool to maintain power which they think they can maintain through stoking nationalism, anti EU rhetoric - there will certainly be a lot of pain to be felt that the "evil EU" "foreign powers who wish to break our union" can be blamed for.

Sam Russell

beggars_bush wrote: »

A lot of ingredients for food stuffs comes from the uk

But nowhere near the amount of junk food that comes in from the UK.

How much UK food is not available from EU suppliers or Irish suppliers?

Strazdas

What amazes me about the current stance is that there is scarcely any difference between the ERG position (a bunch of lunatics basically) and the UK govt position.

I don't think we appreciate just how much Brexit UK has moved to the right.

BluePlanet

Some of them, particularly online just want to injure the EU and believe these are maneuvers to eventually break up the EU.
Ireland and the border presents a weak link, but they are surely eyeing sectoral mini deals in place of a FTA.

theguzman

The UK appears to be walking away from the withdrawal agreement and heading swiftly for a hard brexit. Are we facing the spectre of a hard border retuning to Northern Ireland now?