Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 

But these people either funded, or were drivers behind, Leave - huge difference between that and voting.

Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 

I see we’re just going back to the silly arguments so now I’m implementing the following policy.

Keep this thread to discussion on News on Brexit Developments only. That’s why I opened this debate again.

I don’t want to see the petty arguments about the merits of Brexit. We’ve argued over 3 years over this.

I do not want to see stupid arguments about who funded who’s group/side. It is just irrelevant.

---------- Post added at 11:07 ---------- Previous post was at 10:47 ----------

The Current Brexit News Developments are as follows:

1. Finland and France give Boris Johnson until 30th September to come up with proposals with alternatives to Irish Backstop, or it is over.
   
2. Brexit Secretary, Steve Barclay heading to Brussels Fri for urgent Brexit talks.
   
3. The Supreme Court of the United Kingdom and it’s 11 Justices are expected to release their decision on the case of whether Boris Johnson legally advised Queen to prorogue Parliament for 5 weeks.

Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...-a9113451.html

Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 

The EU’s position is odd. They insist on advance agreement of a technical solution for a problem that may never arise, despite abundant evidence that it is politically impossible for the British to accept it, and at the imminent risk of actually creating the border problems they claim to want to avoid.

It’s almost as if there’s a greater prize to be had in getting the British side to agree to a mechanism that it cannot later exit without the EU’s permission - permission that would be being sought right about the time each side was trying to get the best concessions out of the other in a permanent trade deal. I wonder, to what extent the EU side is still trying to assess how likely we are to push the nuclear button and leave on 31 October, before making a final judgment about what it wants most - an actual shed-load of real headaches on their desks about 6 weeks from now, or a 2 year break in which the border problem can be solved along with everything else.

Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 

Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 

I'm at a loss as to who is trying to fool who here? :shrug:

The EU want (need, desire, expect) a backstop type arrangement or it's no deal.

However, if a no deal is what happens, where does that leave the EU and their trading complexities without the 'desired' backstop?

If the EU are capable of managing with no deal, then surely the backstop isn't such a big thing . . . apart from the ties it then binds us with :tiptoe:

Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 

If my wife lost her job, we could manage - but we’d prefer not to have to...

Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 

The backstop protects the integrity of the Single Market. No deal and a hard border has the same result for the EU.

Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 

Not quite. Whatever apocalyptic queues, shortages and general sky-falling occurs on the island of Great Britain, will occur also on the island of Ireland, most of which is remaining in the EU. A withdrawal agreement without a backstop provides vital continuity for a vulnerable member state, at the trivial cost of deferring a solution to border management - a solution that isn’t required on 31 October *if* there’s a withdrawal agreement to ensure temporary continuity.

This is so eye-poppingly obvious that it is difficult to escape the conclusion that the EU prizes the backstop not for its theoretical safeguards two years down the road, but because it creates a bargaining chip in future trade negotiations.

Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 

While I do accept your thoughtful input into the thread, and unlike others you do accept invitation to "agree to disagree" to avoid circular arguments, it would be my view the EU would be better placed to mitigate for an island of 4m people than we can two islands of 66m.

Everything is, and always will be a bargaining chip, that'll be the case until capitalism collapses.

Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 

But what if it was up to your wife whether she lost her job or not? Would she voluntarily leave her job if she didn’t have to?

---------- Post added at 18:52 ---------- Previous post was at 18:47 ----------

The problem is, is that the backstop has now become Brexit.

Neither side will climb down now, so now they would have to Engineer a solution that both keeps and removes the backstop so both sides can claim a win.

Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 

Link

What is that supposed to mean? Everything short of that is going to blocked by the EU.


Seems strange and quite sinister that Ireland are blocking things. They have a massive amount to lose.
Eg Link

Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 

Or a lot to gain in trade terms by freezing the UK out.

Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 

The Withdrawal Agreement is just an interim arrangement, making the backstop a de facto ongoing Brexit arrangement It is the thing that would be in place beyond 2020.

Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 

Protecting the Single Market isn’t “sinister” any more than the UK wouldn’t entertain closing the border but allowing immigrants to walk the Channel Tunnel freely.