Brexit (Old)

[Pierre]

Originally Posted by 1andrew1

A few Brexiters who believed what David Davis (we can still have all the benefits of the single market) and Liam Fox (easiest deal ever) are nursing what you described as butt hurts.

You, as most others, are confusing this agreement with a future trade deal or some other arrangement.

This is not a trade deal, this is setting out where we stand immediately after we leave in March. There is then a 2year transition period were trade deals, Northern Ireland and all other things are sorted out. I thought someone as knowledgeable as you would know this.

[jfman]

I’m now more confident than ever that in the end we will remain in the EU.

This deal that nobody wants is a result of the fact there are no solutions to the major problems around Ireland and customs arrangements.

[1andrew1]

Originally Posted by Pierre

You, as most others, are confusing this agreement with a future trade deal or some other arrangement.

This is not a trade deal, this is setting out where we stand immediately after we leave in March. There is then a 2year transition period were trade deals, Northern Ireland and all other things are sorted out. I thought someone as knowledgeable as you would know this.

Not really as the timescales they mentioned are long in the rear view mirror. But I'll take the compliment.

[Dave42]

Originally Posted by jfman

I’m now more confident than ever that in the end we will remain in the EU.

This deal that nobody wants is a result of the fact there are no solutions to the major problems around Ireland and customs arrangements.

and keeping the good Friday agreement too

[Sephiroth]

There is a solution to the Irish problem; call the EU's bluff. We won't build a border- watch them panic and not build one either.

A Leaver as PM would have been tough with the EU once their tricks had become obvious.

[1andrew1]

Originally Posted by Sephiroth

There is a solution to the Irish problem; call the EU's bluff. We won't build a border- watch them panic and not build one either.

A Leaver as PM would have been tough with the EU once their tricks had become obvious.

The Leavers bottled it when it came to being PM and staying as Brexit secretary. They wouldn't have been tough with the EU.

---------- Post added at 23:09 ---------- Previous post was at 23:05 ----------

Originally Posted by Mr K

Do you mean Rees Mogg or Farage??

It was a highly accurate description of both so I too am left pondering which.

[jfman]

Originally Posted by Sephiroth

There is a solution to the Irish problem; call the EU's bluff. We won't build a border- watch them panic and not build one either.

A Leaver as PM would have been tough with the EU once their tricks had become obvious.

That’s not a solution, and undermines our ability to set meaningful tariffs if the people can simply move items from the EU into the UK via a non-existent land border.

Nobody can be tough with the EU as they hold all the cards. They always have and always will.

[Sephiroth]

Originally Posted by jfman

That’s not a solution, and undermines our ability to set meaningful tariffs if the people can simply move items from the EU into the UK via a non-existent land border.

It is a solution to the Irish question. Of course good will pass - tariff free; that's the whole point. The perfidious Irish government won't allow their economy to go to Ludwig and the hegemonic EU will be in a right state of panic.

Plus we can examine stuff that we suspect needs examining some miles inland.

This is all about not allowing the EU to bully us into the submission that May has managed to attain.



---------- Post added at 23:20 ---------- Previous post was at 23:17 ----------

Originally Posted by jfman

T<SNIP>

Nobody can be tough with the EU as they hold all the cards. They always have and always will.

It hasn't been tried.

As soon as you split the pack, in this case Ireland, by playing tough on the Irish border question and not accepting the false argument that a border will bring back terrorism, you put the EU on the back foot.

Sure, they'll start doing stupid things - but instead we can laugh at them and just get on with our own business. It'll all settle down as things start to stir over there.

[jfman]

Originally Posted by Sephiroth

It is a solution to the Irish question. Of course good will pass - tariff free; that's the whole point. The perfidious Irish government won't allow their economy to go to Ludwig and the hegemonic EU will be in a right state of panic.

Plus we can examine stuff that we suspect needs examining some miles inland.

This is all about not allowing the EU to bully us into the submission that May has managed to attain.

So the solution is to do random customs checks miles from the land border?

This is going to be fantastic- UK traders who perhaps aren’t even engaging in cross border trade being inconvenienced for living near the land border on the island of Ireland.

We’ve bullied ourselves into submission by starting off a timebound sequence of events with no coherent plan to reach a destination that we can’t even agree upon.

Conservative politicians arguing over policies they probably don’t even agree with just to position themselves to succeed Theresa May and a Government with no electoral mandate have weakened their negotiating position themselves.

The EU have just had to sit back and watch.

[1andrew1]

Originally Posted by jfman

So the solution is to do random customs checks miles from the land border?

This is going to be fantastic- UK traders who perhaps aren’t even engaging in cross border trade being inconvenienced for living near the land border on the island of Ireland.

We’ve bullied ourselves into submission by starting off a timebound sequence of events with no coherent plan to reach a destination that we can’t even agree upon.

Conservative politicians arguing over policies they probably don’t even agree with just to position themselves to succeed Theresa May and a Government with no electoral mandate have weakened their negotiating position themselves.

The EU have just had to sit back and watch.

if I wasn't living here, it would be comedy gold.

No wonder there's no decent comedies on TV, everyone's watching Sky News or BBC 24!

[jfman]

As we approach the end of March and the cliff edge then we will withdraw Article 50.

If Brexit was going to happen it needed a larger mandate than 52-48. The funding controversies, fake news and xenophobia aside the 52 can’t actually agree what they want.

There also needed to be a second referendum to give the Government a mandate to go forward and pursue a type of Brexit (Norway, Canada, Switzerland, other). However, we know the problem with that is Remain would win unless it was kept off the ballot.

Ideally the UK also needed a decisive general election (regardless of who won). Neither party is unified to the extent they can rely on all of their MPs to vote one way. In the example of the Conservatives they probably need 400+ MPs to not be subject to the extreme wings of the party.

The EU27 obviously aren’t unified but they at least put up a single negotiator and have all stayed relatively silent throughout the process. We have live streaming our disagreements making it clear to the EU the people sitting in front of them are in a weakened situation.

May could easily be toppled from within, Labour could win an election and Leave would almost certainly lose if the question was put to the people again. At the same time they know, and we know, that No Deal isn’t a realistic option.

[Angua]

Originally Posted by Gavin78

The fairy tale is the one we have now this mockery of a deal laid out to please the remain camp having a PM that voted remain who didn't carry out the wishes of those that actually wanted to "Leave".

Not only to please the remain camp but to please herself in getting something she voted for.

I feel cheated that I had to compromise to a bunch of spoilt brats that threw their dummy out of the cot because things didn't go the way they wanted.

But it does not please remain voters. It is mostly all the worst aspects of membership but with no say.

As the Bostonians said in 1773 - no taxation without representation. Whilst what we pay may not be classed as tax, the sums involved need directly elected representatives.

[Sephiroth]

Originally Posted by jfman

So the solution is to do random customs checks miles from the land border?

This is going to be fantastic- UK traders who perhaps aren’t even engaging in cross border trade being inconvenienced for living near the land border on the island of Ireland.

We’ve bullied ourselves into submission by starting off a timebound sequence of events with no coherent plan to reach a destination that we can’t even agree upon.

Conservative politicians arguing over policies they probably don’t even agree with just to position themselves to succeed Theresa May and a Government with no electoral mandate have weakened their negotiating position themselves.

The EU have just had to sit back and watch.

Everything you say is correct. I just add the dimension of pushing back at the EU and the perfidious Irish government in preference to rolling over as May has done.


---------- Post added at 09:18 ---------- Previous post was at 09:15 ----------

Originally Posted by jfman

As we approach the end of March and the cliff edge then we will withdraw Article 50.

If Brexit was going to happen it needed a larger mandate than 52-48. The funding controversies, fake news and xenophobia aside the 52 can’t actually agree what they want.

There also needed to be a second referendum to give the Government a mandate to go forward and pursue a type of Brexit (Norway, Canada, Switzerland, other). However, we know the problem with that is Remain would win unless it was kept off the ballot.

Ideally the UK also needed a decisive general election (regardless of who won). Neither party is unified to the extent they can rely on all of their MPs to vote one way. In the example of the Conservatives they probably need 400+ MPs to not be subject to the extreme wings of the party.

The EU27 obviously aren’t unified but they at least put up a single negotiator and have all stayed relatively silent throughout the process. We have live streaming our disagreements making it clear to the EU the people sitting in front of them are in a weakened situation.

May could easily be toppled from within, Labour could win an election and Leave would almost certainly lose if the question was put to the people again. At the same time they know, and we know, that No Deal isn’t a realistic option.

A very sober assessment.


---------- Post added at 09:22 ---------- Previous post was at 09:18 ----------

I will venture another assessment. The draft political protocol that accompanied the draft agreement is all full of ‘best endeavours’ verbiage.

The Maybot is hanging her hat on that being an expression of sincerity from the EU side.

If that sincerity includes working together with the EU to speedily develop the technological customs solutions, then her plan stands a chance.

Question is, what are the EU’s real intentions?

[papa smurf]

Michael Gove leading Cabinet 'gang of five' with plan to force Theresa May into last-minute Brexit changes


https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics...e-theresa-may/


That didn't take long


The Environment Secretary, who stepped back from the brink of resignation on Friday, will meet Andrea Leadsom, Chris Grayling, Penny Mordaunt and Liam Fox over the next two days to agree the terms of their ultimatum.

[jfman]

The intention of the EU is to demonstrate to the rest of the member states that leaving isn’t viable. That could be achieved through the UK remaining, a bad deal, or no deal. All three options currently on the table satisfy the EU position somewhat.

The EU, like any Union, has to satisfy it’s own interests first and foremost. Despite our delusions of grandeur, the consequences for us were always going to be far greater than for them.

Negotiators for Greece in the 2015 financial crisis look back and lament that their mistake was believing the EU were negotiating at all. The EU had mapped out all of the options suitable to them and it was “take it or leave it”.