Brexit thread III

18911131469

Comments

  • Gee DGee D Shipmate
    I suspect that for those wanting England to be great again, it means their having jobs, being listened to and with none of these nasty foreigners running around. That sounds elitist, I know, but its what they and their equivalents here are after.
  • DoublethinkDoublethink Shipmate
    edited July 14
    It’s depressing how quickly the lessons of history are lost to one economic shock.

    I am not sure I can ever forgive George Osborne and his mates for what they have done to this country. Austerity was a choice, and it was cover for an ideological aim, to reduce the size of the state by 5 to 10 percent - which they never discussed with the wider public, for which they had no democratic mandate and which has resulted in the deaths of tens of thousands and this complete clusterfuck.
  • chrisstileschrisstiles Shipmate
    It’s depressing how quickly the lessons of history are lost to one economic shock.

    I am not sure I can ever forgive George Osborne and his mates for what they have done to this country. Austerity was a choice, and it was cover for an ideological aim, to reduce the size of the state by 5 to 10 percent - which they never discussed with the wider public, for which they had no democratic mandate and which has resulted in the deaths of tens of thousands and this complete clusterfuck.

    And I suspect some of the worst effects are yet to be felt, the large cuts to council cuts have been somewhat papered over by selling council assets, and all the indications are that many councils are running up against the limits of this approach.
  • Dave WDave W Shipmate
    Eutychus wrote: »
    I think this from Philip Hammond is telling:
    I don't think Whitehall really ever believed that they would actually carry out the [no deal] plans we laid so carefully over two years."

    Certainly France has made actual plans, built actual infrastructure, and deployed actual staff with a view to No Deal. I think we've taken the possibility much more seriously here than across the water.

    I think that quote is from David Davis, not Hammond.
  • Thanks for the correction!
  • Dave WDave W Shipmate
    Eutychus, does there seem to you to be a generally shared view in France regarding what things would be like following a no deal exit? Chaos, serious difficulties, or relatively minor inconveniences?
  • EutychusEutychus Admin
    edited July 15
    I'd say that at grass-roots level, there's little concen, mostly because many people still vaguely think Brexit won't happen at all - most Latin countries would have simply ignored an inconvenient referendum result. There is universal bemusement about the behaviour of the government, which to everyone, including those at senior political levels, appears to have completely lost its mind.

    At those more technical and political levels, I know for a fact that there was serious concern back in March. I'd say this has been mitigated somewhat by the government and civil service using the intervening time to implement practical measures to prepare: for instance, I've recently had to apply for some additional customs paperwork for my business. This comes across as a big difference with the UK where the government appears wholly self-absorbed.

    We've been much more concerned, and affected, by the 'yellow vests' movement than Brexit to date. We certainly don't share the 'cut-offness' concerns that would ensue in the case of No Deal for the UK, although we are not immune from rather less direct knock-on effects that are hard to predict.
  • HugalHugal Shipmate
    Yes it appears that Europe as a whole has been preparing for Brexit whilst we have not. Time and against we have been told we are not ready. Time and again we have been told that Brexit will be bad for us. Europe has listened. We have not.
    I despair
  • chrisstileschrisstiles Shipmate
    Hugal wrote: »
    Yes it appears that Europe as a whole has been preparing for Brexit whilst we have not. Time and against we have been told we are not ready. Time and again we have been told that Brexit will be bad for us. Europe has listened. We have not.
    I despair

    But it's fine because the UK government believes that it can use no deal to get a better deal, and that foreigners are incapable of reading the English media.
  • HugalHugal Shipmate
    Hugal wrote: »
    Yes it appears that Europe as a whole has been preparing for Brexit whilst we have not. Time and against we have been told we are not ready. Time and again we have been told that Brexit will be bad for us. Europe has listened. We have not.
    I despair

    But it's fine because the UK government believes that it can use no deal to get a better deal, and that foreigners are incapable of reading the English media.

    Yes both candidates want to use it. They don’t think the EI will let us crash out despite them saying they would. Oh well hello chlorinated chicken
  • EutychusEutychus Admin
    edited July 18
    Hugal wrote: »
    Yes it appears that Europe as a whole has been preparing for Brexit whilst we have not. Time and against we have been told we are not ready. Time and again we have been told that Brexit will be bad for us. Europe has listened. We have not.
    I despair

    Apparently, a senior EU aide agrees:
    "We have seen what has been prepared on our side of the border for a hard Brexit. We don't see the same level of preparation on the other side of the border"
  • Why do we aspire to these things, they are not good things.

    They are for us.
  • ClimacusClimacus Shipmate
    Eutychus wrote: »
    Apparently, a senior EU aide agrees:
    ...

    Frans Timmermans didn't hold back...
    In another interview for the programme, the EU Commission's First Vice-President, Frans Timmermans, said UK ministers were "running around like idiots" when they arrived to negotiate Brexit in 2017.

    Mr Timmermans said while he expected a "Harry Potter-like book of tricks" from ministers, instead they were like Lance Corporal Jones from Dad's Army.
    He's familiar with your sitcoms as well.
  • The expectation of some serious talk and the dawning realisation, in horror, that the other side doesn't actually have a plan at all, is certainly an impression I've heard reported.
  • Gee DGee D Shipmate
    Climacus wrote: »
    Eutychus wrote: »
    Apparently, a senior EU aide agrees:
    ...

    Frans Timmermans didn't hold back...
    In another interview for the programme, the EU Commission's First Vice-President, Frans Timmermans, said UK ministers were "running around like idiots" when they arrived to negotiate Brexit in 2017.

    Mr Timmermans said while he expected a "Harry Potter-like book of tricks" from ministers, instead they were like Lance Corporal Jones from Dad's Army.
    He's familiar with your sitcoms as well.

    Very true. The sad part is that probably no UK politician could make the same sort of comment about TV shows in any of the other (other is true for just over 2 months more!!!!) EU countries.
  • Barnabas62Barnabas62 Purgatory Host, Epiphanies Host
    Recent TV programmes? How about Chernobyl? Even the Soviet government, after initial politically motivated denial, got real about the disastrous impact. Or Cersei in Game of Thrones final series? Forgetting the truth that if you play the Game of Thrones, you win or you die? I heard Jeremy Hunt on R4 this morning playing the fault card again. Too busy campaigning to address realities I suppose. He is probably right to believe that the majority of the 160,000 Tory faithful will see such truth stuff as just more of the politics of fear.

    A Shipmate said much earlier that too many Tory ministers had demonstrated a classic public schoolboy response. Too used to other people clearing up their shit to even be aware of how shitty the shit really was. Looks as though ex-council estate grammar school boy David Davies may have caught the disease. Hard to blame Timmermans and Barnier for their frustration.
  • chrisstileschrisstiles Shipmate
    Barnabas62 wrote: »
    Recent TV programmes? How about Chernobyl? Even the Soviet government, after initial politically motivated denial, got real about the disastrous impact. Or Cersei in Game of Thrones final series? Forgetting the truth that if you play the Game of Thrones, you win or you die? I heard Jeremy Hunt on R4 this morning playing the fault card again. Too busy campaigning to address realities I suppose. He is probably right to believe that the majority of the 160,000 Tory faithful will see such truth stuff as just more of the politics of fear.

    As the votes will now be in, I presume he's campaigning for the next but one leadership.
  • chrisstileschrisstiles Shipmate
    Why do we aspire to these things, they are not good things.

    They are for us.

    Possibly, if they can be persisted indefinitely and without consequence. As they can't and as attempting to re-establish them would be nigh on impossible at this point in history hankering after them is probably delusional at best.
  • HugalHugal Shipmate
    You never know who will win. Polls have been wrong.
  • sionisaissionisais Shipmate
    Climacus wrote: »
    Eutychus wrote: »
    Apparently, a senior EU aide agrees:
    ...

    Frans Timmermans didn't hold back...
    In another interview for the programme, the EU Commission's First Vice-President, Frans Timmermans, said UK ministers were "running around like idiots" when they arrived to negotiate Brexit in 2017.

    Mr Timmermans said while he expected a "Harry Potter-like book of tricks" from ministers, instead they were like Lance Corporal Jones from Dad's Army.
    He's familiar with your sitcoms as well.

    Including 'Allo, 'Allo. Full of stereotypes, but informative. Also written by Jimmy Perry and David Croft.
  • DoublethinkDoublethink Shipmate
    edited July 18
    Why do we aspire to these things, they are not good things.

    They are for us.

    I would dispute that, I don't - for example - aspire to that kind of relationship with my friends and relations. I don't aspire to be a bully or a dictator - personally or professionally and I am unsure why I should aspire to that for my country. Wanting that power assumes you always know the best outcome, that you can not be mistaken, and that the experiences of others do not matter. I don't think that is any more true for nations than it is for people.

    I think it is also unethical and likely to corrupt one's moral judgement.
  • HugalHugal Shipmate
    edited July 18
    The Evening Standard reported that according to the government’s budgetary advisors a no deal Brexit would cost £30 billion a year. That is on the lowest figures. It could be more. So no money for the tax refunds promised. More proof you shouldn’t believewhar you read on a bus.
  • sionisaissionisais Shipmate
    Hugal wrote: »
    The Evening Standard reported that according to the government’s budgetary advisors a no deal Brexit would cost £30 billion a year. That is on the lowest figures. It could be more. So no money for the tax refunds promised. More proof you shouldn’t believewhar you read on a bus.

    I don’t think those who voted to leave are convinced or bothered now and any post-exit drawbacks and inconveniences will be attributed to the EU or the U.K. civil servants who tried to sabotage it.

  • Barnabas62Barnabas62 Purgatory Host, Epiphanies Host
    True. The post Brexit political environment may also be a post-fact environment. Of course other people and institutions will be to blame! "We won so we couldn't possibly be wrong, could we?"

    Well, yes! You could and you are!

    But when will the truth of our global political and economic decline finally dawn? I don't know the answer to that but I suspect it might be quite a while yet. Whatever issues this generation may face, we are serving the next generation of UK citizens a pretty kettle of fish and I don't expect them to be too pleased about it. But I may be gone before that comes to fruition.
  • EutychusEutychus Admin
    edited July 19
    I'm puzzled as to the impression given by some of the UK papers this morning that in voting effectively not to suspend the Commons during the pre-exit date period, no-deal Brexit has somehow been avoided.

    The Commons can doubtless vote to prevent any PM unilaterally and pre-emptively leaving with no deal, but that is not at all the same thing as voting to leave with a done deal (or not leave at all), and won't actually prevent No Deal. Given the time left, the Withdrawal Agreement on the table is the only plausible option to do so, and that's already been rejected three times...

    Once again the fact that No Deal is the default appears somehow to have fallen by the wayside. I'm pretty sure there will be no more extensions from Brussels, not least because as posted upthread the EU-27 have, unlike the UK, spent the extension time putting measures in place to cope with No Deal.
  • Barnabas62Barnabas62 Purgatory Host, Epiphanies Host
    Pre Brexit has often been post fact.
  • There might be another extension - especially if Boris's government collapses straight away. But no guarantees.

  • If I were looking at the UK political landscape from Brussels right now, I wouldn't see any more chance of A50 being withdrawn or of the WA being adopted after the collapse of a Johnson government than now.
  • Gee DGee D Shipmate
    Eutychus wrote: »
    The Commons can doubtless vote to prevent any PM unilaterally and pre-emptively leaving with no deal, but that is not at all the same thing as voting to leave with a done deal (or not leave at all), and won't actually prevent No Deal. Given the time left, the Withdrawal Agreement on the table is the only plausible option to do so, and that's already been rejected three times...

    Once again the fact that No Deal is the default appears somehow to have fallen by the wayside. I'm pretty sure there will be no more extensions from Brussels, not least because as posted upthread the EU-27 have, unlike the UK, spent the extension time putting measures in place to cope with No Deal.

    Indeed, there's under 2/12 months left, far too little time to start further negotiations even were the EU willing to make further concessions. And why would they want to talk with Boris, a man in whom they could have little trust?
  • Why do we aspire to these things, they are not good things.

    They are for us.

    I would dispute that, I don't - for example - aspire to that kind of relationship with my friends and relations.

    Nor do I, but not everybody is my friend or relation.
  • Eutychus wrote: »
    I'm puzzled as to the impression given by some of the UK papers this morning that in voting effectively not to suspend the Commons during the pre-exit date period, no-deal Brexit has somehow been avoided.
    I'm often puzzled by some UK papers. Period.

    In this instance all Parliament has achieved is ensure that the government can't dismiss Parliament over the next few months, which could have been a means of clearing the road for the default no-deal Brexit. If Parliament is sitting there is at least the chance of them blocking that road for an alternative outcome - though I can't see what that might be other than voting through the withdrawal agreement they've repeatedly rejected (and, which presumably the government wouldn't want to put forward again, esp. if Johnson is the next PM) or voting to withdraw the A50 declaration and abandon Brexit.
  • DoublethinkDoublethink Shipmate
    Why do we aspire to these things, they are not good things.

    They are for us.

    I would dispute that, I don't - for example - aspire to that kind of relationship with my friends and relations.

    Nor do I, but not everybody is my friend or relation.

    OK, but, I don’t relate to the rest of society like that either.
  • KarlLBKarlLB Shipmate
    edited July 19
    Why do we aspire to these things, they are not good things.

    They are for us.

    I would dispute that, I don't - for example - aspire to that kind of relationship with my friends and relations.

    Nor do I, but not everybody is my friend or relation.

    OK, but, I don’t relate to the rest of society like that either.

    Indeed. Other people are still as valuable as us even if not our friends or relatives. ISTM that Marvin's "good for us" is the same "good for us" as owning slaves was 'good' for plantation owners and having a secret police is 'good' for dictators.

    I don't think that's a good 'good'. It's "works to our advantage" which is different to morally good.
  • Barnabas62Barnabas62 Purgatory Host, Epiphanies Host
    edited July 19
    My last hope is that all this renegotiation nonsense before end October is purely for internal consumption (internal meaning the 160,000 Tory Party members) and that both Boris and Jeremy understand the political and technical realities.

    But if the winner (and Boris is by far the more likely) means what he says, then (short of a No Confidence Vote) No Deal will happen, the EU will get blamed in the UK press, and we will somehow have to survive the resulting disruption.

    Even if the EU were prepared to re-open the Withdrawal Agreement under changed political circumstances, the technical difficulties of any renegotation are such that they would take months to resolve. The idea that the backstop can be treated in isolation without reference to its interconnectedness with the rest of the Withdrawal Agreement is just nonsense.

    So the only way to "move on" by October 31 this year is No Deal coupled with the survival of this government. If the government falls first and there is no alternative to a General Election, then I think we would have to suspend Article 50, or ask for a further substantial extension of the date. Surely everyone can see that we could not possibly combine No Deal with No Government?

  • EutychusEutychus Admin
    edited July 19
    Barnabas62 wrote: »
    short of a No Confidence Vote) No Deal will happen
    A VNC offers no more assurance of preventing No Deal than yesterday's vote. It's insane to presume on the EY-27s indefinite indulgence. (Somebody pointed out the other day that while the UK could dictate what happened at its border controls post No Deal, nobody could predict what the French might do, as though this was somehow unfair...)
    the EU will get blamed in the UK press
    This is a dead cert whatever happens, even if invoking Art 50 were to be withdrawn!
    Even if the EU were prepared to re-open the Withdrawal Agreement under changed political circumstances, the technical difficulties of any renegotation are such that they would take months to resolve.
    What's to renegotiate? I think it's as good as it gets in the current circumstances. It's an agreement that's been reached by the UK and the EU that offers a way forward. Nobody else has got anywhere near achieving that.
    The idea that the backstop can be treated in isolation without reference to its interconnectedness with the rest of the Withdrawal Agreement is just nonsense.
    This makes it sound as if the backstop is the part they're likely to revisit. The only way is if there's a customs union, or 'Brexit in name only' as the detractors call it. I can't see that happening at this point: it's much too reasonable.
    I think we would have to suspend Article 50
    Who's "we"? If there was any political will for that, it would have already happened.
    Surely everyone can see that we could not possibly combine No Deal with No Government?
    I think the general public has become inured to the realities of No Deal at this point. The only way forward I see is for the UK to actually start preparing for No Deal.

  • I am preparing for No Deal but here's the reason why I'm not (yet) fatalistic.

    Boris's administration is going to crash and burn. The only question is when. Before the 31st October is what I hope and pray for. Not because I dislike Boris - though I do - but because I care about my nation.

    Boris will struggle to command the confidence of the Commons - even if he could command the support of his own party. The arithmetic means that he's still dependent on the DUP and whilst he will no doubt promise them much, they are entirely ruthless.

    If he does persevere with his leave by the 31st October strategy then he will inevitably have to go No Deal because there is nothing that can be changed in the WA.*

    There are (I think) enough Tories who will put country before party and bring down the government if No Deal looks likely.

    If Boris falls before 31st October then I do think the EU will grant the UK an extension, for two reasons
    1. It's in their interests to do so because a)No Deal has implications for the EU that they are prepared for but want to avoid and b) if the UK ends up not leaving in the end, that's a win-win for the EU.
    2. If the government of the UK fell and thus a GE and probably another referendum were on the horizon then it would be contrary to the EU's self-image to not grant the UK an extension. The key people in the EU really do believe in the EU's principles and the respect for members' democratic processes.

    (Oh and 3, the EU has already indicated that an extension would be considered if there's good reason to do so).

    To summarise; I think that there are (just) enough MPs who will block Boris's stupidity and the EU will be magnanimous if there's a realistic chance of the UK finding a way forward. What they really don't want is for this nonsense to continue hence there must be that realistic chance.

    AFZ

    *Another WA is theoretically possible without Theresa May's redlines but Boris's own are essentially the same and even if Boris did go to the EU with workable proposals, there is no time to get that sorted before October. Hence there are only 4 options: May's Deal, No Deal, No Brexit or an Extension. All have consequences and the last one depends on the good-will of the EU
  • Has any party with any reasonable chance of winning a GA pledged to hold a second referendum? I've lost track. If none has, I wouldn't be too sure about the EU's patience.
  • Labour are nearly there.
    But this is the key: In the event of a GE, because of the way the Labour Party Manifesto writing works, the party's platform would include a referendum. I know Corbyn's still hedging but come a GE that would go...

    Boris could hold on to being PM by organising a referendum and convincing the EU to wait until that happens... I wouldn't bet on that but I also wouldn't bet against it!

    AFZ
  • chrisstileschrisstiles Shipmate
    Barnabas62 wrote: »
    My last hope is that all this renegotiation nonsense before end October is purely for internal consumption (internal meaning the 160,000 Tory Party members) and that both Boris and Jeremy understand the political and technical realities.

    It's obviously not directed at the vote itself - as the reality of most postal ballots is that the vast majority of the votes are returned straight away, so the most benevolent interpretation is that it's down to internal dynamics of the Tory party and trying to shore up their time as leader (Johnson) or signal their suitability for leadership should the first candidate fail at some point (Hunt).

    But that interpretation would imply that there's no end date on that performance.
  • RocinanteRocinante Shipmate
    Macron would likely be the main obstacle to another extension. By all accounts he took a lot of convincing to give us a 6 month extension, when most other EU leaders were happy with a year. 6 months has turned out to be the worst of both worlds, really: long enough for our myopic politicians to lapse back into complacency and in-fighting, not long enough to change anything.

    I think Macron sees advantage for France in no-deal Brexit, it would also distract from his domestic troubles.
  • chrisstileschrisstiles Shipmate
    But that interpretation would imply that there's no end date on that performance.

    LRB has a piece by Will Davies which comments indirectly on this tendency:

    "The Conservative leadership contest is a curious spectator sport (save for the 160,000 electors with Conservative Party membership cards) in which the first contestant to accept reality is the loser. Words have now broken completely free of their factual moorings; Johnson and Jeremy Hunt seem committed to touring the nation and its television studios misreporting and misdescribing the economic, legal and political realities that will confront the next prime minister. To do otherwise would be an act of surrender."
  • HugalHugal Shipmate
    Yep any realistic hope of a true understanding by the big two has gone out the window.
    Ten recent vote to sit and avoid prorogation is the only way Parliament can realistically do something. They fully understand the situation and are using what power they have to stop a no deal Brexit.
  • EutychusEutychus Admin
    edited July 19
    Rocinante wrote: »
    Macron would likely be the main obstacle to another extension. By all accounts he took a lot of convincing to give us a 6 month extension (...)
    I think Macron sees advantage for France in no-deal Brexit, it would also distract from his domestic troubles.
    Perhaps Macron was simply more clear-sighted than most: the extension hasn't achieved much.

    I don't think he's cynical enough to wish for a No-Deal Brexit simply as a distraction. In continental Europe, France is first in line for disruption due to proximity. I can't see any immediate national benefits to us of No Deal, although there may be some hidden regional opportunities.
  • Barnabas62Barnabas62 Purgatory Host, Epiphanies Host
    Eutychus.

    Who's we? A caretaker government pending a General Election after a vote of no confidence in the present government.

    Their options.

    1. Let No Deal happen.
    2. Go cap in hand to the EU fora further extension, until the shape of the next parliament is known.
    3. Revoke Article 50.

    3. might follow a failed attempt at 2.

    The double nightmare scenario is No Deal with No Government. And that's possible if we are in a General Election Campaign or trying to sort out some kind of workable coalition following a no overall majority election.
  • Jane RJane R Shipmate
    Macron was right. The extension has just allowed more time for political grandstanding. The Civil Service may be scurrying around behind the scenes trying to make contingency plans, but most of the businesses that can relocate (to a country with a sane government) will be busy with plans to do so. The extra six months may have helped them, I suppose.

    I desperately want the UK to stay in the European Union, but I see no reason why the rest of the EU would want to put up with us after the performance of the last three years. The only (faint) possibility of staying in would be to revoke Article 50 and spend the next fifty years or so eating humble pie. At least we'd have pie...
  • RicardusRicardus Shipmate
    Eutychus wrote: »
    Has any party with any reasonable chance of winning a GA pledged to hold a second referendum? I've lost track. If none has, I wouldn't be too sure about the EU's patience.

    There is presumably the strong possibility of a minority Labour government that depends on the SNP and/or Liberal Democrats for support, both of whom would almost certainly make their support conditional on a second referendum.
  • RocinanteRocinante Shipmate
    edited July 19
    Eutychus wrote: »
    Perhaps Macron was simply more clear-sighted than most: the extension hasn't achieved much.

    I don't think he's cynical enough to wish for a No-Deal Brexit simply as a distraction. In continental Europe, France is first in line for disruption due to proximity. I can't see any immediate national benefits to us of No Deal, although there may be some hidden regional opportunities.

    I don't think Macron wants No Deal simply as a distraction, however I think he may regard it as something on the positive side of the balance, if it's going to happen anyway. If I was him I would be preparing the red carpet for refugees from financial services and other easily-moved industries. Those jobs will boost France's economy and thereby his popularity.

    It's becoming clear that France is better prepared for No Deal than we are, also they will have the advantage of ongoing free trade with their EU neighbours. The Dover/Calais link is going to be hideously disrupted at both ends, but we have more to lose than them.


  • DoublethinkDoublethink Shipmate
    Labour policy is now to hold a confirmatory referendum, essentially available-leave-deal (or no deal if there isn't one) vs remain.

    The remaining ambiguity lies in their aspiration to win a GE, get an extension and negotiate a soft brexit (EEA / customs union or similar) and then when they put that to a confirmatory referendum, it is unclear whether they'd campaign for leave-with-our-deal or remain.

    From the perspective of those wanting a second referendum, a Labour government or rainbow alliance is your best chance of getting one. (You are highly unlikely to get remain without a second referendum.) It doesn't matter which way the opposition would campaign in a referendum if no such vote is held - and realistically, the Lib Dems are not going to form the bulk of the next government.
  • DoublethinkDoublethink Shipmate
    Barnabas62 wrote: »
    The double nightmare scenario is No Deal with No Government. And that's possible if we are in a General Election Campaign or trying to sort out some kind of workable coalition following a no overall majority election.

    There's always a government - ministers don't leave their posts until they are replaced.

  • Rocinante wrote: »
    If I was him I would be preparing the red carpet for refugees from financial services and other easily-moved industries
    I think Frankfurt has the lead in that respect.
This discussion has been closed.