Brexit (Old)

[nomadking]

Originally Posted by 1andrew1

One thing to remember is that it was the UK who devised the backstop as a solution to the Irish border problem. So now we're trying to backtrack on an offer we made. Hmm. Can't see that working too well.

The issue isn't the backstop as such. It is that it's under one-sided control by the EU. They decide whether it ends. They will leave it in indefinitely, unless we give in yet more than by the massive amount we already have.

Originally Posted by jfman

If the EU can be certain of anything it’s that we will blink if they do not. There’s no Parliamentary will for no deal, no adequate preparations made and nobody will want the blame for it.

To make concessions now would only embolden elements of the Conservative Party into demanding more. We have shown no coherent strategy for two years, and there’s no indication we can for two months.

Parliamentary will is a mere inconvenience at this stage. In normal times it might present significant political difficulties but these are not normal times and last night Parliament deliberately chose to approve non-binding amendments and to reject binding ones. It has expressed an opinion. Nothing more. And the legal position is that we will leave without a deal if no deal has been ratified, on the 29th of March. Parliament could have changed some or all of this. It changed nothing.

While I still think it more likely that the EU will cave in, albeit using a form of words that makes it look like they haven’t, the chances of No Deal are now far higher.

[jfman]

Originally Posted by Chris

Parliamentary will is a mere inconvenience at this stage. In normal times it might present significant political difficulties but these are not normal times and last night Parliament deliberately chose to approve non-binding amendments and to reject binding ones. It has expressed an opinion. Nothing more. And the legal position is that we will leave without a deal if no deal has been ratified, on the 29th of March. Parliament could have changed some or all of this. It changed nothing.

While I still think it more likely that the EU will cave in, albeit using a form of words that makes it look like they haven’t, the chances of No Deal are now far higher.

I agree that’s the current legal position.

That can change quickly when staring down the barrel though. Parliament backed the non-binding motions out of cowardice and left Theresa May chasing the unicorns that have eluded her for two years. What happens in two weeks when she returns to Parliament for the third time offering an identical deal is anyone’s guess.

[1andrew1]

Originally Posted by nomadking

The issue isn't the backstop as such. It is that it's under one-sided control by the EU. They decide whether it ends. They will leave it in indefinitely, unless we give in yet more than by the massive amount we already have.

I don't believe the fear-mongers. There's no evidence that the EU would do this.

[pip08456]

"And now the French President outlined European plans that would see Britain forced into the backstop unless Mrs May concedes access to the UK’s fishing waters in the future deal."

https://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/10...fishing-latest

Originally Posted by pip08456

"And now the French President outlined European plans that would see Britain forced into the backstop unless Mrs May concedes access to the UK’s fishing waters in the future deal."

https://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/10...fishing-latest

Negotiation is a two-way street...

Also - https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/amp/business-47060676

Barclays is moving €190bn (£166bn) of assets to Dublin because it "cannot wait any longer" to implement its Brexit contingency plan.

The High Court, which has approved the move, says the move involves 5,000 clients. However, few jobs in London are expected to be affected.

The business amounts to around 15% of the bank's £1.2 trillion in total assets and was previously conducted in the UK through branches across the EU.

The plans will be in place by 29 March...

...The bank had to ask the High Court for approval to transfer the business which took place in branches in Germany, France, Spain, Italy, the Netherlands, Portugal and Sweden for corporate banking, investment banking and some wealthy private clients.

The judgement from Mr Justice Snowden said: "Due to the continuing uncertainty over whether there might be a no-deal Brexit, the Barclays group has determined that it cannot wait any longer to implement the scheme".

The scheme is based on a "no-deal" Brexit, the judgement said. This envisages the parts of the bank's business which is affected losing their "passporting" rights which currently allow them to conduct investment services activities in the remaining 27 EU member states.

"The design of the scheme has been based upon an assumption that there will be no favourable outcome of the current political negotiations between the UK and the EU as regards passporting or the grant of equivalence status to the UK in respect of financial services," the judgement said.

[jfman]

Originally Posted by pip08456

"And now the French President outlined European plans that would see Britain forced into the backstop unless Mrs May concedes access to the UK’s fishing waters in the future deal."

https://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/10...fishing-latest

Unpopular French President tells French voters he will stand up for French interests.

I, for one, am shocked at this revelation.

[nomadking]

Originally Posted by 1andrew1

I don't believe the fear-mongers. There's no evidence that the EU would do this.

The EU's chief negotiator Michel Barnier says the Irish backstop is "part and parcel" of the UK's Brexit deal and will not be renegotiated

Ultimately it is the EU insisting on the backstop. The removal of the backstop is contingent on the EU agreeing to any future deal.

RECALLING the Union's and the United Kingdom's intention to replace the backstop solution on Northern Ireland by a subsequent agreement that establishes alternative arrangements for ensuring the absence of a hard border on the island of Ireland on a permanent footing

So either we give in any EU terms or the backstop remains. We cannot unilaterally bring in a hard border.

Farage:-

He said Mrs May now realised the mistake made in agreeing to the backstop, adding: 'She signed up to something that no country - unless it had been defeated in war - would have signed up to.'

Juncker:-

Ireland's border is our border.

Not this side of it, or is it?

I don't get all the fuss about a hard border. We can't be tied down by threats from the IRA for all eternity. The Downing Street Declaration stated that any agreement(ie Good Friday agreement) had to be with "consent freely given". As the terrorist threats have continued there is NO "consent freely given", unless you want to redefine criminal acts such as mugging and rapes. IE Giving in after initial violence followed by just threats constitutes consent. Either the IRA has disbanded and disarmed or it hasn't?

The ‘consent freely given’ were the referendums on both sides of the border in 1998 - from Wikipedia.

The Good Friday Agreement referendum, 1998 was a referendum held in Northern Ireland over whether there was support for the Good Friday Agreement. The result was a majority (71.1%) in favour. A simultaneous referendum held in the Republic of Ireland produced an even larger majority (94.4%) in favour.

[Mr K]

Originally Posted by nomadking

Ultimately it is the EU insisting on the backstop.

The backstop was our idea/solution ! Now we want to get rid of it !

[Sephiroth]

Originally Posted by 1andrew1

I don't believe the fear-mongers. There's no evidence that the EU would do this.

As Pip says, there is evidence. Macron's public statement on TV that we would stay in the Backstop unless we gave him our fishing rights.

[Mr K]

Originally Posted by Hugh

Negotiation is a two-way street...

Mmm, expect the subject of Gibraltar aswell as fishing rights come up again if we want to renegotiate...

[nomadking]

Originally Posted by Hugh

The ‘consent freely given’ were the referendums on both sides of the border in 1998 - from Wikipedia.

The "freely" bit shouldn't include the threats at the time of IRA violence. Therefore technically the referendum result wasn't valid, or it wouldn't in any other country in the World.
2016.

Enda Kenny, the Irish premier, has suggested guns that were supposed to have been “put beyond use” as part of the peace process are still in circulation and were used in a murder in Dublin last week.

[1andrew1]

Originally Posted by jfman

Unpopular French President tells French voters he will stand up for French interests.

I, for one, am shocked at this revelation.

Very true. We get the best possible deal from the EU currently. Anything else is going to be costly in terms of fishing rights, employment, etc.

[Sephiroth]

… and another point or two.


1/
Corbyn's lot voted for Article 50 and for the Withdrawal Act 2018.

2/
Corbyn has been banging on about being in the Customs Union and protecting the GFA.

3/
TM's deal keeps us in the Customs Union and prevents an Irish Border.

4/
Corbyn's lot voted against TM's deal, non-the-least because of the Backstop and of course much the most so they could get into power.
5/
Corbyn's lot voted against the Brady amendment on no honestly held basis.


Corbyn is the worst political snake I've ever seen.