Brexit discussion thread XIII (Please read OP before posting)

Mr.Nice Guy

Now being reported a meeting will happen on Monday.

https://twitter.com/DanielFerrie/status/1317161013683380224

This is getting harder to figure out than the status of Fungie. Ultimately, one side is going to have to offer a concession to move things along. I can't see it based on the current positions each side have taken.

Call me Al

I think this is an on-point anslysis of today's rhetoric
https://twitter.com/AmateurEconomix/status/1317171692519804931?s=20

54and56

Isn't is ironic that no one in the UK press has asked BoJo (that I can recall) if an Australian deal is so good why are the Australians so dissatisfied with the 'Australia style deal', that they have spent several years negotiating in good faith with the EU, to secure more attractive trade terms and are close to doing so?

Soon it will only be the UK enjoying the benefits of the old style "Australian" type deal with the EU

Detritus70

I quite like how this channel cuts through the spin and bullsh*t. This video is, of course, about today's developments and he suggests that BoJo is throwing a few soundbites at the UK press whilst keeping his options open.
One of the very few well-informed English channels, this guy puts out quite a volume of content.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4-68xL9KWwM

Professor Moriarty

One of two things will happen. The EU will ignore the mindless soundbites from Johnson and, come Monday, Frost will "convince" Johnson that he should allow the EU one last chance to come to their senses. Or Johnson's ego will ensure that he slams the door shut on talks and he crashes the UK out of the EU.

reslfj

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

I think the EU should maximise every opportunity to take economic advantage of the UK in ways that suit the EU best

That is what every negotiator should do - within the law of course. It was the UK wanting to leave and the EU27 should not pay any costs (or its cost shoud be minimised)

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

Simultaneously, any other aspects of any agreement should disadvantage the UK in every possible way that doesn't cause harm to the EU,

But this is where it stops. No purely punishing actions against the UK for leaving.

But the consequences of losing all EU rules on January 1. will likely feel very bad anyway.

Lars

Professor Moriarty

reslfj wrote: »

That is what every negotiator should do - within the law of course. It was the UK wanting to leave and the EU27 should not pay any costs (or its cost shoud be minimised)



But this is where it stops. No purely punishing actions against the UK for leaving.

But the consequences of losing all EU rules on January 1. will likely feel very bad anyway.

Lars

Why no "punishing actions"? The UK has behaved disgracefully so they aren't entitled to goodwill. The more the EU sticks it to the UK without damaging the EU's interests, the more others will be inclined to stay. Nothing personal, if leaving the EU is seen to be an act of self-harm, then that enhances EU cohesion. And that is good for Ireland's long term future.

The Raging Bile Duct

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

Why no "punishing actions"? The UK has behaved disgracefully so they aren't entitled to goodwill. The more the EU sticks it to the UK without damaging the EU's interests, the more others will be inclined to stay. Nothing personal, if leaving the EU is seen to be an act of self-harm, then that enhances EU cohesion. And that is good for Ireland's long term future.

The EU has been great for fostering peace and cooperation withinn Europe. For it to go out of its way to punish a former member for not playing by its rules would undermine everything it symbolises imo. It would lead to a lot of disquiet amongst member states I think.

Professor Moriarty

The Raging Bile Duct wrote: »

The EU has been great for fostering peace and cooperation withinn Europe. For it to go out of its way to punish a former member for not playing by its rules would undermine everything it symbolises imo. It would lead to a lot of disquiet amongst member states I think.

Which member states would object to the UK being punished in a way that doesn't harm the EU? I would find it hard to think of a credible member state that wouldn't take secret pleasure in seeing the UK punished for the past four years of arrogant dishonesty.

The Raging Bile Duct

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

Which member states would object to the UK being punished in a way that doesn't harm the EU? I would find it hard to think of a credible member state that wouldn't take secret pleasure in seeing the UK punished for the past four years of arrogant dishonesty.

Letting themselves be hoisted by their own petard while still treating them as fairly as you would any third country is grand imo. Actively finding ways to punish them more is dropping to their level and would leave a very bad taste in my mouth. I would prefer the EU to rise above.

Professor Moriarty

The Raging Bile Duct wrote: »

Letting themselves be hoisted by their own petard while still treating them as fairly as you would any third country is grand imo. Actively finding ways to punish them more is dropping to their level and would leave a very bad taste in my mouth. I would prefer the EU to rise above.

Indeed. However, it is in the EU's existential interest for the UK's exit to be as painful as possible without damaging the EU's interests. And if the EU can hide the punishment then that's even better. The EU makes an example of the UK and looks good while doing it. Win win for the EU. Like I say, nothing personal, just business.

swampgas

There really isn't a need to actively punish the UK. A good working relationship is, in the long term, in the interests of both sides. However it will take a long time for the UK to rebuild any meaningful goodwill with the EU. And that lack of goodwill may be punishment enough, as the EU may be reluctant to engage with the UK to come to mutually beneficial arrangements. Trust has been destroyed. The UK will have a lot of work to do (and will probably need a change of government) before the EU will invest much time and effort in a relationship with a country so venal and craven, beyond the minimum required to protect its own interests.

Professor Moriarty

swampgas wrote: »

There really isn't a need to actively punish the UK. A good working relationship is, in the long term, in the interests of both sides. However it will take a long time for the UK to rebuild any meaningful goodwill with the EU. And that lack of goodwill may be punishment enough, as the EU may be reluctant to engage with the UK to come to mutually beneficial arrangements. Trust has been destroyed. The UK will have a lot of work to do (and will probably need a change of government) before the EU will invest much time and effort in a relationship with a country so venal and craven, beyond the minimum required to protect its own interests.

Indeed. Leaving them to twist in the wind may well be sufficient punishment and serve as a visible example to others. But the EU should still do everything that would enhance the EU's economy and future cohesion. And if that includes hidden punishment that doesn't negatively affect the EU then that's what should be done. This 'punishment' isn't revenge, it's taking care of the EU's interests and, by extension, Ireland's interests. This is business. There are no 'friends'. Every country needs to maximise its own opportunities for the sake of its citizens.

View

There is a fundamental difference between not doing any favours or granting special arrangements and engaging in punitive actions.

The simplest course is just to ignore the U.K. and avoid entering into any special arrangements with them on a case by case as Brexiters would like to do, at both EU level and at member state level. Ireland has already done the latter.

Punitive actions though only apply if another country actively breaches agreements that it has entered into, since doing nothing in such a case is effectively approving them breaching the agreement.

Capt'n Midnight

Winning on fishing could be very expensive for the UK. If only there was a plan. Unless of course the plan had nothing to do with the UK improving outside the EU

https://www.rte.ie/news/brexit/2020/1016/1171941-brexit-energy-negotiations/

According to a European Parliament report in 2017, the EU-UK electricity and gas market was worth some €6bn in 2015, more than 80% of which was in natural gas.

BonnieSituation

RobMc59 wrote: »

If it`s true the UK has told the EU not to bother,at least we should find out next week whose bullsh*tting with all the tough talking.

The UK are bullshítting as they always are.

That you think there's a chance it's the EU is laughable.

Peregrinus

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

One of two things will happen. The EU will ignore the mindless soundbites from Johnson and, come Monday, Frost will "convince" Johnson that he should allow the EU one last chance to come to their senses. Or Johnson's ego will ensure that he slams the door shut on talks and he crashes the UK out of the EU.

Neither of these things. The statement from no. 10 saying that Frost has asked Barnier not to come on Monday also says that Frost will speak to Barnier later in the week. That is what will happen.

UK is not ending the talks. It is not even suspending the talks. It's just saying that the face-to-face session scheduled for Monday won't go ahead.

This is all posturing. The dimmer Brexiters - there are a lot of them - are crowing that Boris has given the finger to the EU and opted for no-deal. When the talks continue they will crow that Boris's stern resolve in giving the finger to the EU has brought them crawling back to the table.

Enzokk

Peregrinus wrote: »

Neither of these things. The statement from no. 10 saying that Frost has asked Barnier not to come on Monday also says that Frost will speak to Barnier later in the week. That is what will happen.

UK is not ending the talks. It is not even suspending the talks. It's just saying that the face-to-face session scheduled for Monday won't go ahead.

This is all posturing. The dimmer Brexiters - there are a lot of them - are crowing that Boris has given the finger to the EU and opted for no-deal. When the talks continue they will crow that Boris's stern resolve in giving the finger to the EU has brought them crawling back to the table.

Yeah, that seems to be the view of what is happening next week,

https://twitter.com/SamCoatesSky/status/1317144488289206273?s=20

So they are not having official talks next week, but Barnier and Frost will be talking to each other. Gives Johnson space to claim his victory and that he "suspended" trade talks when in fact this has not happened at all.

Here is Tony Connelly on some of what is happening,

https://twitter.com/tconnellyRTE/status/1317075499198353409?s=20



Thread Reader of reaction from EU

Basically, the UK stance of the EU not offering a Canada style deal is shifting the focus as that would have required going over line by line on a deal and would have needed a extension of the transition. The UK refused that so they ruled out the Canada deal. But as someone pointed out before as well that what the UK wants is more than Canada (it includes professional qualifications, Mode 4 free movement for work reasons, procurement opportunities) so this is once again the UK is being, well I will say it, they are lying.

I see a lot of commentators are of the opinion that a deal will be reached. I think many of us would agree with this, but I am beginning to wonder whether the deal that can be reached will be so bare bones that it will be heralded when it is done, but once people realise what is actually in the deal they will come to the conclusion that no-deal would have been better as it would have at least forced the UK back to the table sooner. Maybe a death by 1000 cuts scenario instead of a quick guillotine.

Just to add some leader reactions, I am not a Micheal Martin fan but I do feel sorry for him. He has become leader at the most challenging of times for his country and the world. But the difference in tone he seems to set on what is happening compared to Macron is stark here,

https://twitter.com/EmmanuelMacron/status/1317108087887745024?s=20

According to translate, "In view of Brexit, the British need a deal more than the European Union. The Europeans are ready to continue negotiations. Our conditions are clear and known. It is now up to the UK to choose whether or not it wants a deal."

Compare that to the quotes from Martin,

https://twitter.com/tconnellyRTE/status/1317100250537013255?s=20

He does state there are areas of disagreement in the tweets before that, but his words could be used to confirm their view that the EU will come crawling back. He still has a lot to learn when it comes to communication around Brexit and unfortunately for him he is going to have to learn very quickly. Look at Macron's statement, it is clear and obvious and there is no room for misunderstanding it. His statement would have been more appropriate in March or June even, not 2 weeks before the real EU deadline on getting a deal.

fash

reslfj wrote: »

But this is where it stops. No purely punishing actions against the UK for leaving.

But the consequences of losing all EU rules on January 1. will likely feel very bad anyway.

Lars

Not for the simple fact of "leaving" - punishment should be reserved for correcting bad behaviour - such as reneging on the withdrawal agreement.

20silkcut

fash wrote: »

Not for the simple fact of "leaving" - punishment should be reserved for correcting bad behaviour - such as reneging on the withdrawal agreement.

At the end of the day these are just trade talks. Some Brexiteers and some of the more excitable people on the EU side think it’s 1939 or 1914. But there are no armies mobilised, massed and waiting on the border for Irreversible hair trigger declarations. A fudge here or a fudge there will kick this on to eternity and that’s exactly what has happened over the last 4 years as many predicted.
And it could very easily continue like that for another 4 or 8 or 20 years. Like most trade talks. There is no political capital to be made out of ending this. The fact that we have filled pages and pages of this thread talking about fish and paperwork and customs has really put me thinking what is all this about? Normally this stuff is obscure and only for a few colourful grandstanding British politicians it would be.
The only thing brexit has achieved is raising the profile of a few of these nutter British politicians.
The only question in my opinion, is how the transition period can be extended without anyone losing face. And there’s two months for someone to engineer something there.
Even if No deal occurs on the 31st December fudging can still occur on the 1st January and forever thereafter.

Professor Moriarty

Peregrinus wrote: »

Neither of these things. The statement from no. 10 saying that Frost has asked Barnier not to come on Monday also says that Frost will speak to Barnier later in the week. That is what will happen.

UK is not ending the talks. It is not even suspending the talks. It's just saying that the face-to-face session scheduled for Monday won't go ahead.

This is all posturing. The dimmer Brexiters - there are a lot of them - are crowing that Boris has given the finger to the EU and opted for no-deal. When the talks continue they will crow that Boris's stern resolve in giving the finger to the EU has brought them crawling back to the table.

Well, if you are a betting person, get your money on a deal now. The bookies have No Deal as favourite.

Professor Moriarty

20silkcut wrote: »

At the end of the day these are just trade talks. Some Brexiteers and some of the more excitable people on the EU side think it’s 1939 or 1914. But there are no armies mobilised, massed and waiting on the border for Irreversible hair trigger declarations. A fudge here or a fudge there will kick this on to eternity and that’s exactly what has happened over the last 4 years as many predicted.
And it could very easily continue like that for another 4 or 8 or 20 years. Like most trade talks. There is no political capital to be made out of ending this. The fact that we have filled pages and pages of this thread talking about fish and paperwork and customs has really put me thinking what is all this about? Normally this stuff is obscure and only for a few colourful grandstanding British politicians it would be.
The only thing brexit has achieved is raising the profile of a few of these nutter British politicians.
The only question in my opinion, is how the transition period can be extended without anyone losing face. And there’s two months for someone to engineer something there.
Even if No deal occurs on the 31st December fudging can still occur on the 1st January and forever thereafter.

This may well be a path forward. However, asking for an extension would make Johnson look even more pathetic. They aren't going to stay. And having a bare bones deal hurriedly cobbled together would be a sticking plaster at best. And it might not be in the EU's interest. So, finding some way of tootling along after January until the Tories come to their senses (won't happen) or there is a change of government (massive Tory majority) is certainly an option but I can't see it happening.

Maybe there will be an eleventh hour deal, but I'm not sure if that would be in Ireland's or the EU's best interests unless the EU's red lines remain sacrosanct. Unfortunately, I think No Deal is now that bit more likely and might even be in Ireland's long term interest despite the immediate economic shock.

Leroy42

I'm caught in two minds over this.

Cobbling together a last minute deal will make it look like the threat to walk, the IM bill etc all worked. Why would the likes of the current members, or even moreso US and China not take the same approach. EU are able to be bullied.

On the other hand, that is letting emotions override pragmatism, no deal causes massive issues for millions and will cost.

Both sides have backed themselves into a corner. The EU, IMO, should have been far more decisive in the past, particularly about the IM and I think they should have tried harder to counter the Brexit propaganda in the UK press.

fash

Leroy42 wrote: »

The EU, IMO, should have been far more decisive in the past, particularly about the IM and I think they should have tried harder to counter the Brexit propaganda in the UK press.

How?! It's controlled and owned by brexiters and sold to an audience high on 40 years of europhobia? You think the daily express would accept a sponsored advert from the EU commission? You think an express reader would want to read about how great the EU actually is?

20silkcut

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

This may well be a path forward. However, asking for an extension would make Johnson look even more pathetic. They aren't going to stay. And having a bare bones deal hurriedly cobbled together would be a sticking plaster at best. And it might not be in the EU's interest. So, finding some way of tootling along after January until the Tories come to their senses (won't happen) or there is a change of government (massive Tory majority) is certainly an option but I can't see it happening.

Maybe there will be an eleventh hour deal, but I'm not sure if that would be in Ireland's or the EU's best interests unless the EU's red lines remain sacrosanct. Unfortunately, I think No Deal is now that bit more likely and might even be in Ireland's long term interest despite the immediate economic shock.

Britain could declare no deal and have a no deal party on the 31st December and farage could be cheerleading and congratulating himself etc etc. Then come 1st January and thereafter , talks continue. Transition period is over but sure we will just leave things as they are until the talks conclude. We won’t call it a transition period just a period of mutual understanding to benefit the self interest of both parties until something better comes along. As long as Britain gets its no deal and there is no give on the EU side everybody is happy. There won’t be anyone on the streets over this. Why change anything until talks are concluded. Why put up customs posts etc just hold tough continue with current arrangements until talks are concluded. Whenever or if ever that may be.

Enzokk

Leroy42 wrote: »

I'm caught in two minds over this.

Cobbling together a last minute deal will make it look like the threat to walk, the IM bill etc all worked. Why would the likes of the current members, or even moreso US and China not take the same approach. EU are able to be bullied.

On the other hand, that is letting emotions override pragmatism, no deal causes massive issues for millions and will cost.

Both sides have backed themselves into a corner. The EU, IMO, should have been far more decisive in the past, particularly about the IM and I think they should have tried harder to counter the Brexit propaganda in the UK press.

Depends on the deal in the end but this analysis is interesting,

https://twitter.com/DmitryOpines/status/1317407321400762368?s=20

So an experienced trade negotiator sees the actions of the UK exactly as you would expect if they are going to climb down from their position.

Professor Moriarty

20silkcut wrote: »

Britain could declare no deal and have a no deal party on the 31st December and farage could be cheerleading and congratulating himself etc etc. Then come 1st January and thereafter , talks continue. Transition period is over but sure we will just leave things as they are until the talks conclude. We won’t call it a transition period just a period of . mutual understanding to benefit the self interest of both parties.

Wouldn't that be a BRINO? That is an anathema to Brexiteers. The ERG would go bananas and their glovepuppet can't be having that. Also, I'm not sure that EU governments need even more uncertainty. It's been four years now and the UK is still deceiving, insulting and berating the EU. If I were Germany or France, I would be shrugging my shoulders, turning my back, and focusing on the pandemic.

ancapailldorcha

Leroy42 wrote: »

I'm caught in two minds over this.

Cobbling together a last minute deal will make it look like the threat to walk, the IM bill etc all worked. Why would the likes of the current members, or even moreso US and China not take the same approach. EU are able to be bullied.

On the other hand, that is letting emotions override pragmatism, no deal causes massive issues for millions and will cost.

Both sides have backed themselves into a corner. The EU, IMO, should have been far more decisive in the past, particularly about the IM and I think they should have tried harder to counter the Brexit propaganda in the UK press.

People here were livid about the proroguing of Parliament last year. That'll be as nothing compared to no deal.

Honestly, I think this is just theatrics. The civil servants, negotiatiors, sherpas and other grown ups will still be talking behind closed doors. This is just another incarnation of Johnson's "oven ready" deal which will be presented to the British public as a triumph of alleged British negotiating skill accomplished by standing up to Brussels so long as nobody scrutinises it at all and the tabloid readers are unlikely to do that.

I disagree with your assessment of how this will look. It's crucial that the EU gives the UK every opportunity to either climb down and reverse Brexit or grow up and negotiate a sensible deal. It's a horrific look for a club to be seen as or perceived to be trampling over a former member but in this case the conservatives are doing the trampling.

The ultimate difference between the EU and the UK when it comes to trade is that the EU is a veteran negotiator of trade deals while the UK is callow. The whole world can see how badly the UK has bungled and gaffed its way through this from insulting the EU to senior politicians voting against deals they negotiated.

The EU has acted as everyone predicted it would according to this:



The British drew red lines. The EU, not wanting to waste time presented the UK with the only option which they shot down again and again while offering nothing in return. All the Brexiters have done is complain and moan. They created this mess and have done nothing to fix it. All the while they've blustered and bullsh*tted and outside the tabloids and their readers they've humiliated themselves.

I don't think the British public are anywhere near as zealous about Brexit as they once were, insofar as they were at all. I think some of them voted for Johnson because they still wanted to leave while many voted for him because he offered a clear way forward in contrast with the prevarications offered by Jeremy Corbyn. Even if they continue to blame the EU which I doubt for all but the most fanatic of Brexiters, the government will be under huge pressure to spend inordinate sums of cash just maintaining the status quo, a task which will be made all but impossible given that they've opted to sever the economic equivalent of the carotid artery.

Fortunately, my passport has a few years to go so. I just want to see it end at this stage.

20silkcut

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

Wouldn't that be a BRINO? That is an anathema to Brexiteers. The ERG would go bananas and their glovepuppet can't be having that. Also, I'm not sure that EU governments need even more uncertainty. It's been four years now and the UK is still deceiving, insulting and berating the EU. If I were Germany or France, I would be shrugging my shoulders, turning my back, and focusing on the pandemic.

But there is no political advantage to a trade war for either side.
I understand the disaster capitalists want one, but they are non existent on the EU side and only a minority in the U.K. parliament. Johnson could swat away their protests. Especially after no deal.
if there was a week or a month of chaos things could be quickly returned to as you were in the interests of public welfare. The current period is better than chaos no matter what way you look at it. And there is absolutely nothing to be gained politically by a trade war. No way do the disaster capitalists hold that much sway.

ancapailldorcha

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

Wouldn't that be a BRINO? That is an anathema to Brexiteers. The ERG would go bananas and their glovepuppet can't be having that. Also, I'm not sure that EU governments need even more uncertainty. It's been four years now and the UK is still deceiving, insulting and berating the EU. If I were Germany or France, I would be shrugging my shoulders, turning my back, and focusing on the pandemic.

A BRINO would be the best outcome. As much of the status quo as possible without any more EU taxpayer money going to dodgy parties like UKIP or the BXP.

People are fed up of this. The ERG are nothing. Rees-Mogg might have turned himself into a meme but when was the last time you heard from John Redwood or Mark Francois? They were handy for the media but the pandemic has largely made Brexit as a while irrelevant politically.

All they really have to do is give the UK some token concessions like blue passports, bendy bananas and maybe a brake on free movement that comes with a cessation of access to the single market should it be used and that's it. The usual lot will be moaning but now there's no MEP posts for them and Farage failed to get elected seven times. He's done. Look at what's he's had to resort to: