Brexit discussion thread XIV (Please read OP before posting)

J Mysterio

Another embarrassing climbdown as UK to recognise EU ambassador to the UK.

https://twitter.com/BrigidLaffan/status/1387656375296307203?s=20

UK stance on this was absolutely farcical in the first instance, and did nothing to improve strained relations.

Nate--IRL--

Knuckles Kennedy wrote: »

The EU's cough has been softened.

In what practical sense? Specifics if you please.

Nate

J Mysterio

Knuckles Kennedy wrote: »

Hello storm.
Meet teacup.
Coming shortly after the European Parliament ratified the trade deal by an overwhelming majority it was probably felt the point had been made.
The EU's cough has been softened.

The EUs cough has been softened? In what way? Can you explain what is the basis for your view?

The UK government were acting like a petulant brat with this. They then realised that they needed their ambassador to the EU to be accepted, so they have now reveresed their position and climbed down, as they have on most things in negotiations with the EU.

Another silly and embarrassing episode to add to the list.

Triangle

Knuckles Kennedy wrote: »

The UK has made clear the recognition of the diplomatic status of the EU ambassador is a matter of its own choosing and should not be considered an automatic right.
It was important the EU understood this but I see no reason why going forward it will affect relations between the two.

That's absolute dribble. Both sides took it as fact that they'd have ambassadors and when the UK refused, they quickly found out that acting like trump ends up with trump results.
The only side to these negotiations that didn't act childish, was the EU.

Edit: by childish I mean by letting their emotions I. E. Hatred lead them in their negotiations.
Sensible adults do negotiations less with emotion and more with logic.

Strazdas

Knuckles Kennedy wrote: »

The UK has made clear the recognition of the diplomatic status of the EU ambassador is a matter of its own choosing and should not be considered an automatic right.
It was important the EU understood this but I see no reason why going forward it will affect relations between the two.

That smacks of absolute rudeness and lacking in any sense of diplomacy. You don't tell someone else "We're doing you a big favour by allowing you to send an ambassador.....don't you forget it".

Professor Moriarty

Knuckles Kennedy wrote: »

And you don't think the EU was ever rude towards the UK throughout the entire Brexit process ?
They're grown-ups.They understand.

How did the UK benefit by not recognising the EU's ambassador until now?

Professor Moriarty

Knuckles Kennedy wrote: »

About as much as the EU didn't benefit.
But an important diplomatic point was made.

What was that important diplomatic point?

Seth Brundle

Knuckles Kennedy wrote: »

And you don't think the EU was ever rude towards the UK throughout the entire Brexit process ?
They're grown-ups.They understand.

At what point was the EU rude in its words or actions?

timetogo1

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

What was that important diplomatic point?

That the UK doesn't know what it's doing or will uturn on decisions after a couple of months (but we knew that already)

Professor Moriarty

Knuckles Kennedy wrote: »

That it's important not to take things for granted.
But as I wrote earlier, it's a storm in a teacup.
Hardly worth worrying about in the scheme of things don't you think ?

Au contraire. When you want to negotiate a trade deal with a large bloc that is your largest market, and your friends and partners as the UK prime minister calls them, you don't disrespect that bloc by petulantly disrespecting their diplomats. You play the game and foster goodwill. That's how business is done. But such is Tory Britain's exceptionalism at the moment, such an explanation would fall on deaf ears.

johnnyskeleton

Knuckles Kennedy wrote: »

It's only four months since the UK was legally entitled to sign trade deals.
Give them chance.
It's almost like you want our nearest neighbour and important export market to fail ...

It is in our interests that the UK:
A) allows our export goods free access to their market (e.g. Irish beef being sold tarriff and quota free in the UK);
has difficulty exporting their goods to countries that we have no difficulty with (Irish cheese being sold in E.U. instead of UK cheese);
C) For our services sector to have access to the parts of the UK market that they want (e.g. UK lending or being able to sell computer services there); and
D) For other countries to prefer Irish services over U.K. services (e.g. aircraft financing in Dublin rather than in London).

So it's not that we want the U.K. to fail, it's that we want to benefit from their act of self destruction while minising the damage caused by same in other areas.

Knuckles Kennedy wrote: »

And you don't think the EU was ever rude towards the UK throughout the entire Brexit process ?
They're grown-ups.They understand.

They do understand. So much is about image and standing that it's got to be seen as deliberate. The rough idea in diplomacy is to be nice to countries that you want to gain favour with, be standoffish with ones that you want to come to you looking for a favour, and be outright hostile with ones you want to provoke a war with.

The UK clearly wasn't being nice to the EU. They tried to be standoffish but it didn't work, and if they insist on continuing to be hostile towards the EU, it's worrying.

fash

Knuckles Kennedy wrote: »

It's only four months since the UK was legally entitled to sign trade deals.
Give them chance.
It's almost like you want our nearest neighbour and important export market to fail ...

And (in line with basic rules of economics) every trade deal they've signed has been worse than those signed by the EU; their deal with the EU has been a humiliating defeat resulting in a border through their country and the much trumpeted deal with the US (the biggest they could possibly get) would give them a 0.07% economic boost in return for destroying their agriculture and food standards, selling out any lucrative parts of the health system and force them into following US rules on food and foreign policy without a say - and that's the best option available to them.

It's 5 years into brexit - how long do you think we should wait?

Professor Moriarty

Knuckles Kennedy wrote: »

A lot longer than four months.
Come back to me in a few years time when the EU is on its 10th Greek bailout,still trying to negotiate that free trade deal with the US they've been at for the past decade,the printing presses have run out of ink to produce any more euros,50% of Southern Europe's young people are still unemployed and Ireland is being told what corporate tax rates it can set.

Do you think Ireland should have left the EU with Britain?

Padre_Pio

Knuckles Kennedy wrote: »

A lot longer than four months.
Come back to me in a few years time when the EU is on its 10th Greek bailout,still trying to negotiate that free trade deal with the US they've been at for the past decade,the printing presses have run out of ink to produce any more euros,50% of Southern Europe's young people are still unemployed and Ireland is being told what corporate tax rates it can set.

I really think you're confusing the responsibilities of the EU with the responsibilities of individual member states.

CelticRambler

Knuckles Kennedy wrote: »

But as I've explained earlier the numbers of EU citizens applying for residency in the UK is considerably higher than was ever predicted.

Huh? Where are you getting your information from? The number you cited earlier corresponds roughly to the number of EU migrants resident in the UK, who were given no choice but to register if they didn't want to totally disrupt their personal and professional lives. The same as applies to all the UK migrants in the EU.

Knuckles Kennedy wrote: »

The ability of the UK to change its immigration rules to meet the demands it faces strikes me as being altogether more positive than having no control over immigration and therefore being unable to predict and plan for future investment to cope with that immigration.

Oh, dear. This is the same old nonsense all over again. The UK had a huge amount of control over its immigration policies, and opted not to exercise it, neither in respect of EU migrants nor non-EU migrants. The UK is not changing the rules in a positive fashion - it has been forced to change the rules by implementing policies that are contrary to the country's needs, and then need a cumbersome workaround.

fash

Knuckles Kennedy wrote: »

Not at all.
The EU has been good for Ireland.Less so for the UK.
Ultimately it comes down to a trade off between economics and sovereignty.
Michel Barnier got it right earlier this week when he said Brexit was a failure for the EU.
I don't think the UK will be the last to leave.

I think not only is that UK the last to leave - but also NI and Scotland will rejoin within 15 years and the rump English state will end up in a "Norway minus" relationship - right where they belong.

Professor Moriarty

Knuckles Kennedy wrote: »

Not at all.
The EU has been good for Ireland.Less so for the UK.
Ultimately it comes down to a trade off between economics and sovereignty.
Michel Barnier got it right earlier this week when he said Brexit was a failure for the EU.
I don't think the UK will be the last to leave.

Perhaps. I think there is a definite possibility that it will be stripped down due to the likes of Hungary being elbowed out and others falling out for economic reasons. What might be left will be a sleeker, richer and more unified Western European bloc. Or it could continue to expand but that brings more diversity and consequentially less convergence.

Sovereignty is a funny one. The economic cost has been and will be large. And for what?

Nody

Knuckles Kennedy wrote: »

The very latest opinion poll puts support for Scottish independence at its lowest level since the 2019 General Election.

NO: 54% (+2)
YES: 46% (-2)

Support has hardly moved since the original referendum in 2014.
What makes you think this will change in the next 15 years ?
Wishful thinking doesn't count.

Why not? It's the basis for your excuse why every trade deal to date is worse than what UK had in the EU as "we need to wait a few years" for them suddenly figuring out how to make better deals out of the blue (they have been allowed to negotiate them for over two years now; the only thing pending on Brexit was the question of the go live date of said trade deal). It's the same excuse you've used for better control of immigration (always had it; never applied it), that not recognizing EU as a diplomat (which they quickly changed when EU refused to actually treat the UK diplomat as one) etc. And that's before we start in on UK actually applying some controls on their borders (you know, sovereign country controlling their borders for imports which UK is not doing atm), the fact immigrants now are more difficult to send away (no EU country will accept them back and hence Pritel's plans are as usual pure Telegraph headline material with zero facts) or the fact they are working double time to implement the NI protocol because EU are taking them to the courts over it but refuse to actually own up to the fact and Boris keep claiming "He'll cancel the NI deal at any time". Do you know one of the major drivers for voting yes for the UK FTA in Brussels? It allows EU to apply tariffs that much faster compared to going through the NI protocol instead for UK breaching the FTA but yes, EU was running scared of big bad Boris...

Capt'n Midnight

Knuckles Kennedy wrote: »

That it's important not to take things for granted.
But as I wrote earlier, it's a storm in a teacup.
Hardly worth worrying about in the scheme of things don't you think ?

The only constitution the UK has is tradition. This is another example of how this government will ignore traditions.

The Roman Empire and the Mongols were very particular about the treatment of their representatives abroad.

This UK point scoring will come back on them at some stage because it's hard to ask for favours when you keep burning goodwill.

Leroy42

Knuckles Kennedy wrote: »

Hello storm.
Meet teacup.
Coming shortly after the European Parliament ratified the trade deal by an overwhelming majority it was probably felt the point had been made.
The EU's cough has been softened.

So the UK gave in in the end? The EU got exactly what it wanted.

Do you think that denying the EU ambassador did anything in terms of ratifying the deal? Was there a chance that it wouldn't be?

And remembering that the UK is still seeking to chance the deal, so they make a point that the EU can't rely on the UK is a good approach?

Another climb down by the UK is the only way to look at this.

ancapailldorcha

Knuckles Kennedy wrote: »

So you don't have a reason why you think Scottish independence will happen within 15 years ?
Fair enough.

Mod: We have a separate thread for this. Please take this discussion there. Thanks.

Akrasia

Knuckles Kennedy wrote: »

A lot longer than four months.
Come back to me in a few years time when the EU is on its 10th Greek bailout,still trying to negotiate that free trade deal with the US they've been at for the past decade,the printing presses have run out of ink to produce any more euros,50% of Southern Europe's young people are still unemployed and Ireland is being told what corporate tax rates it can set.

Hold on, earlier today you said economic predictions are almost always wrong

Is it only other peoples predictions that are wrong or is your crystal ball finely tuned into the future collapse of the EU?

BlitzKrieg

Its not that economic predictions are almost always wrong, its that people react to predictions when they're made so if you predict disaster then the right people react accordingly you end up with inconvenience or nuisance instead of outright disaster.

Despite what the current lazy government of the UK may think and say to public, there were plenty (especially in the bank of england) who took the economic risk of Brexit seriously and have left Boris and co to run their mouths while firm hands have been kept over the money purse. Isnt that why Mark Carney has been a bit of a villain to brexiteers since 2016 because he's been running the bank of england as tight as a ducks arse to keep things stable during all this fiasco. Isnt it why the list of UK's Quantative Easing plans has one specifically for Brexit pretty much on par with what they spent in response to the 2008 economic crisis.

fash

Knuckles Kennedy wrote: »

The very latest opinion poll puts support for Scottish independence at its lowest level since the 2019 General Election.

NO: 54% (+2)
YES: 46% (-2)

Support has hardly moved since the original referendum in 2014.
What makes you think this will change in the next 15 years ?
Wishful thinking doesn't count.

Check out the sentiment of younger Scots - this Turkey (the UK) is done. One would have to be delusional to think the UK will still be together in that time. In particular as English and Scottish politics further polarises: they had EU membership in common: now one is rabidly EU phobic; Scots don't vote Tory - and continue to be more and more excluded from English/UK politics.

Tyrone212

A couple of months ago, the 20th poll in a row showed a majority for independence. You'll always get ones against it mixed in. To use that solely as an example and discount the majority of polls is disingenuous. That poster is always bumming about the UK though....

A Dub in Glasgo

Knuckles Kennedy wrote: »

The very latest opinion poll puts support for Scottish independence at its lowest level since the 2019 General Election.

NO: 54% (+2)
YES: 46% (-2)

Support has hardly moved since the original referendum in 2014.
What makes you think this will change in the next 15 years ?
Wishful thinking doesn't count.

The poll you refer to has been overtaken by another poll released fter your one


Should Scotland be an independent country? (Scot Goes Pop / Panelbase poll, 21st-26th April 2021)

Yes 49%
No 51%

Before Don't Knows are removed, the numbers are -

Yes 47%
No 48%
Undecided 6%

Nody

Brexit; the unicorn that keeps delivering. Remember how UK fishing boats were going to haul in so much more? Yea...

The UK and Norway have failed to reach a fishing deal for this year, with the industry warning that hundreds of crew members will be left out of work.

It means UK fleets will have no access to Norway's sub-Arctic waters, known for their cod catches.

The government said its "fair offer" had been rejected in talks.

The firm UK Fisheries called it a "disgrace", saying fishermen in Hull would be particularly badly affected by the lack of progress.

UK Fisheries chief executive Jane Sandell complained that the UK government had failed "even to maintain the rights we have had to fish in Norwegian waters for decades".

To bad other countries are sovereign as well and refuse to cop on that they need to do what UK tells them to do and get on the program being such a big economical super power after all...

Professor Moriarty

Nody wrote: »

Brexit; the unicorn that keeps delivering. Remember how UK fishing boats were going to haul in so much more? Yea...

To bad other countries are sovereign as well and refuse to cop on that they need to do what UK tells them to do and get on the program being such a big economical super power after all...

I wonder is this the EU using its clout albeit in a relatively minor way. Norway is very much connected to the EU and perhaps it was made known in a quiet way that the EU wouldn't like that deal to go ahead.

Ironically, UK Fisheries is an Icelandic and Dutch owned company.

Nody

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

I wonder is this the EU using its clout albeit in a relatively minor way. Norway is very much connected to the EU and perhaps it was made known in a quiet way that the EU wouldn't like that deal to go ahead.

Ironically, UK Fisheries is an Icelandic and Dutch owned company.

I doubt it; I think the "fair deal" UK offered was anything but fair because let's be honest here Tories could not care less about some fishermen in Scotland. They don't bribe enough to be relevant and will give no seats to the Tories.

CelticRambler

Nody wrote: »

Brexit; the unicorn that keeps delivering. Remember how UK fishing boats were going to haul in so much more? Yea...

To bad other countries are sovereign as well and refuse to cop on that they need to do what UK tells them to do and get on the program being such a big economical super power after all...

But ... but ... Knuckles told us only yesterday that the UK was going to adapt and survive.

Perhaps those fishermen from Hull can cast their nets in the Tasman Sea instead?