1. Boris will spend most of the year playing hardball (emphasis on the 'playing'), dismissing all EU demands as unreasonable, insisting that the EU always cracks at the last minute.
2. UK business will take a no-deal Brexit as its working assumption and postpone all major investment decisions until the situation is 'clearer'. However, as that's what UK business is already doing, no-one will notice the difference.
3. Towards the end of November Boris will announce that there is light at the end of the tunnel, the EU are about to make a deal, etc. He will then concede to absolutely all of the EU's demands, declare that his hardball tactics have paid off and that together we have made a magnificent deal. The Mail, Telegraph and Express will all agree.
4. Now that the worst has been averted, UK businesses will start investing again. This will cause a mini-boom just at the point where the UK leaves the transition period.
5. Economically literate people will point out that the economy is still much smaller than it would have been without Brexit. Everyone will dismiss them as bitter Remoaners. Unfortunately, as Aslan said, no-one is ever told what would have happened.
In fairness - and with the caveat that no-one has provided me with a bite-sized summary of the deal yet - it does seem like Boris hasn't quite conceded absolutely everything.
Perhaps he hasn't, but he'll try to make it look as though the cowardly Foreigners just caved in under his mighty something-or-other...
Meanwhile, at least Ursula von der Leyen can breathe a sigh of relief, and enjoy her (probably Covid-restricted) Christmas. She, and her staff, will have well and truly earned a respite...
Next step for the saner people: force a rethink in Parliament - UK engagement in Erasmus+, ensuring that UK regulations keep in step with EU, or if they deviate they go beyond the EU (more, stronger workers rights; tighter environmental regulations; better animal welfare etc) etc. So that we stay as close to the EU as possible so that our return in a few years will be simpler.
I think @Ricardus deserves due credit for calling this outcome quite a long time ago.
Your fantasy NI house investment is still looking good - fancy letting it to me? I get the NHS plus an EHIC funded by Dublin, I can apply for an Irish passport after 5 years (even if I live in NI) and then wahey, my stolen EU citizen rights are restored!
And after fish fish fish for weeks on end, the British fish people seem to be disappointed...
"I think there will be a lot of disappointed and frustrated fishermen across the country tonight," said Barrie Deas, CEO of the UK National Federation of Fishermen's Organisations.
"I think there was an expectation that the government would deliver quota shares that reflect the resources that are in UK waters," he told BBC News.
Deas said he was also concerned that EU fishing boats would continue to operate up to six miles (10km) from the UK coast, when the fishing industry had hoped for a 12-mile limit.
He said the compromises left the industry feeling let down.
He added, however, that there were positive elements to the deal, including tariff-free trade.
"We hadn't wanted anything extraordinary," he said. "Just the same relationship that the EU currently enjoys with Norway."
Further to the point above, that this may be a unique deal, in decreasing trade, it also by the same token, increases red tape. You've got to admit that as an election slogan, this is unusual, vote for us for more red tape.
I think @Ricardus deserves due credit for calling this outcome quite a long time ago.
Your fantasy NI house investment is still looking good - fancy letting it to me? I get the NHS plus an EHIC funded by Dublin, I can apply for an Irish passport after 5 years (even if I live in NI) and then wahey, my stolen EU citizen rights are restored!
The UK government's summary overview of the deal is annoying, because like many confessions of faith, what it omits to mention is more important than what it states.
It's taken me some reading around to realise that not only does NI remain part of the customs union, it also remains part of the Single Market. My conviction that the reunification of Ireland will occur in the long term has just been reinforced considerably. I wish I had the house to let you.
Meanwhile I see the Channel Islands are apparently going to be allowed to keep existing local fisheries agreements with France (and to have a say in agreeing to do so).
Overall, though, I agree with @quetzalcoatl that what we are looking at here is the embodiment of a parting of the ways. The Economist describes it as "as hard a Brexit as anything but no deal". I fully expect the UK to become even more of a foreign country to me in the future than it is now as a result.
I was struck by the contrast between von der Leyen's speech and Johnson's. She was eloquent and flluent, trying to be positive. He was pedestrian, stammering (as usual) and defensive. I suppose we should be thankful he didn't try to be Churchillian. That, I suppose, is yet to come.
Churchillian? Yes, well he might start to say what a great thing it would be for all the nations of Europe to join together, to cooperate for peace. I'm not holding my breath though.
It will be a cold day in hell when I wish the Sally Army well. Their homophobia is a matter of consistent record, and sufficient for me to find other groups to support.
The salvation army does excellent work and is well worthy of my support.
I suppose that people feel more strongly about something which affects them personally. had no idea that the SA was known as homophobic but it would not surprise me that they don;t feel that homosexuality is a 'good idea'.
I suppose that people feel more strongly about something which affects them personally. had no idea that the SA was known as homophobic but it would not surprise me that they don't feel that homosexuality is a 'good idea'.
I doubt if TSA has homophobia as an official policy or stance, as that would surely be illegal, but there are bound to be some homophobes within its ranks, as there are in ALL churches.
It will be a cold day in hell when I wish the Sally Army well. Their homophobia is a matter of consistent record, and sufficient for me to find other groups to support.
The salvation army does excellent work and is well worthy of my support.
Indeed, but remember that even homophobes can do excellent work.
Back to Brexit. I expect many people feel some sort of relief after all the chaos of *negotiations*, and will want to move on...
I sort of hope that Labour will vote to support the *Deal*, but OTOH part of me hopes that at least some of the Opposition will abstain, just to show how unsatisfactory the whole thing is. YMMV.
The SA’s position is that homosexual practice is inconsistent with scripture. On that basis, they say you can’t be a full member (soldier) if you are gay and not celibate. As in any conservative evangelical church there is a range of views, which includes some people at odds with the official position - but not many, I think.
My late mother, towards the end of her life, was an ‘adherent’ (not quite full member) of the SA and it gave her comfort and companionship. I also think that their work in society is genuine and non-judgemental, and is in many ways truly admirable.
As a gay man I would not feel comfortable attending, but that is no different to any conservative evangelical church - which would also make me uncomfortable.
The other element that puts me off is their misogyny - as I understand it single women are not permitted to be officers, and women must always take a subordinate role in the "joint ministry".
Then there is their total lack of respect for volunteers and donations, for which I have only second-hand evidence, but still it all adds to a picture of an organisation for which some of the most stinging rebukes in the gospel seem to my mind to be made.
Apparently we are to be in a new 'special relationship' with the EU as as a fully sovereign equal. About as equal, I suppose, as we are with the other nation with which we are in a special relationship.
Umm...would that be the US of A, perhaps? With Trump on his way out (TBTG), I'm not sure that Mr Biden is any too keen to make anything of the *special relationship*.
He will have a much larger and more influential group to work with, and this tiny sinking island off the coast of Europe will be of little interest or use to him...
The other element that puts me off is their misogyny - as I understand it single women are not permitted to be officers, and women must always take a subordinate role in the "joint ministry".
Then there is their total lack of respect for volunteers and donations, for which I have only second-hand evidence, but still it all adds to a picture of an organisation for which some of the most stinging rebukes in the gospel seem to my mind to be made.
Fair points. FWIW, I had an aged Aunt (deceased some 30 years ago), who was a life-long member of TSA. Her brother - My Old Dad - was impressed by her Christian witness, and that of TSA, to the extent that it was the only church for which he had any time, so to speak.
As regards donations, I do contribute to TSA online from time to time, and they are most punctilious and courteous in acknowledging same.
Mind you, having read what Thunderbunk and Pomona have said, I may well think about contributing to other groups - I have no time these days for homophobia in any form.
I keep looking at the title of the "dustbin of history" thread, and thinking it's about where Brexshit is taking this soon-irrelevant group of islands.
The other element that puts me off is their misogyny - as I understand it single women are not permitted to be officers, and women must always take a subordinate role in the "joint ministry".
Then there is their total lack of respect for volunteers and donations, for which I have only second-hand evidence, but still it all adds to a picture of an organisation for which some of the most stinging rebukes in the gospel seem to my mind to be made.
I am by no means an apologist for the SA, but single women can become officers in just the same way as single men. You are right, I think, in the fact that for senior appointments the ‘two-body-problem’ role is assigned to the woman in a married ministry team - both get appointments, but the woman gets a lesser one. It’s certainly not good, but might be a lesser evil than the unpaid/unofficial roles and duties historically placed on married women in, say, the CofE? I don’t know - there is a lot of inequality across most churches, I think.
However, can you point me to information about their lack of respect for volunteers and donations? Because of family connections (see earlier) I have donated to their social work in the past. Like BishopsFinger, I would like to avoid this in the future if there is bad practice.
Given the increase in poverty and deprivation which *England* is experiencing - and which will surely get worse because of Brexshit - there will be plenty of opportunities for contributing to relief agencies other than TSA.
Personally, I'm nowadays inclined NOT to support any *Christian* group, because of the oft-found prejudices, homophobia etc. we're talking about tangentially (!). If anyone can suggest to me a suitable charity that is truly liberal and inclusive in its approach, please let me know...
Apparently we are to be in a new 'special relationship' with the EU as as a fully sovereign equal. About as equal, I suppose, as we are with the other nation with which we are in a special relationship.
Yes, in some top quality gas lighting, Mr. Gove said
The greatest prize, however, is the chance now to renew our country and help it to recover from the ravages of the Covid-19 pandemic in a spirit of shared endeavour and solidarity. We have a duty to spread opportunity more equally across the UK. Outside the EU, with a good trade deal in place, we can tackle the injustices and inequalities that have held Britain back.
Because of course, they couldn't have done anything about rampant inequality in the UK while we were in the EU. Even less so because the pesky EU kept spending EU funds on helpful development funds in deprived areas...
If anyone can suggest to me a suitable charity that is truly liberal and inclusive in its approach, please let me know...
Yes; I'd be interested too. I've watched a couple of programmes on the SA and been impressed with the work they do. It is news to me about the misogyny and the treatment of volunteers and donations, although I did know from one of the programmes I watched that gay people can't be SA officers.
Some of the misogyny, at least, sounds like it's historical. For the rest, I was relying on conversations with people who had been closely involved but backed away, which makes the evidence paradoxical, because it was particularly convincing for me for that very reason, but equally is less convincing for others.
@ThunderBunk - please don't think any of us are pressing you for further information, especially of a personal nature.
You have, however, raised an interesting point. I'll see how it goes, but it might be worth a separate thread (NOT bashing the Sally Army - just a general thread about non-judgemental charities...).
I think there may have been a different experience with TSA in the US than the U.K. - possibly because legislation constrains discrimination to a greater degree in general as much as anything else.
They are certainly socially conservative, but I have never heard any firsthand accounts of abusive or exclusionary behaviour in their charitable work in my local community.
I work in health and social care and you do get to hear about dodgy voluntary and private sector agencies but I have literally never, in the past 20 years I’ve worked in this field, heard anyone offline - lgbtq+ or otherwise - complain about them.
Big headline in the Guardian morning about British fishermen feeling betrayed by the Brexit deal. That paper loving the opportunity to report dissatisfaction from people who have always been central to the Brexit narrative. Though it has to be said, having made so much of fishing rights over the last month, Johnson's only got himself to blame.
He won't blame himself, of course. That pesky EU, turning out to be in stronger position than us. Who knew?
Big headline in the Guardian morning about British fishermen feeling betrayed by the Brexit deal. That paper loving the opportunity to report dissatisfaction from people who have always been central to the Brexit narrative. Though it has to be said, having made so much of fishing rights over the last month, Johnson's only got himself to blame.
He won't blame himself, of course. That pesky EU, turning out to be in stronger position than us. Who knew?
Fishing has been allowed to assume a political significance out of all proportion to its economic value.
Political significance is almost always out of proportion with any measure of value. Fishing is a symbol of "taking back control" of territorial waters (which is, itself, an arbitrary concept that encompasses several concepts), ultimately unless one does better than Cnut there's very little control of territorial waters possible. Exploitation of resources is the only control that has any meaning - and that includes who can catch fish. Of course, the question is does a nation have more control if they go it alone, or if they work with other nations? If you want to control resources that extend beyond territorial waters (eg: fish that move freely, oil fields that cover large areas that only partially exist under territorial waters) what choice do you have but to cooperate with other nations?
Fishing is a symbol of "taking back control" of territorial waters (which is, itself, an arbitrary concept that encompasses several concepts), ultimately unless one does better than Cnut there's very little control of territorial waters possible. Exploitation of resources is the only control that has any meaning...
I disagree with the last quoted part. There is also considerable meaning in being able to decide who can (and, more importantly, cannot) enter your territory.
Fishing is a symbol of "taking back control" of territorial waters (which is, itself, an arbitrary concept that encompasses several concepts), ultimately unless one does better than Cnut there's very little control of territorial waters possible. Exploitation of resources is the only control that has any meaning...
I disagree with the last quoted part. There is also considerable meaning in being able to decide who can (and, more importantly, cannot) enter your territory.
I agree. It was the decision of the UK to make concessions as part of a trade deal.
The UK has opted out of the Erasmus student exchange programme with Europe, on the grounds that it is, allegedly, too expensive. (Perhaps too many people are using it?). It is to be replaced by a UK-only scheme yet to be devised, though they have, typically, already come up with a suitable name ('the Turing Programme) to enable British young people to study 'anywhere in the world' - Russia? China? Australia? Canada? the USA, even? Our government will be anxious to prevent the possibility of UK money being used to enable students from Europe to study here, but I am left wondering if there is some other reason to cut our noses off to spite our faces. Mr Rees-Mogg has doubtless warned the Cabinet of the dangerous spread of Jacobinism, and ministers will be alert to prevent our youngsters travelling to the Continent and becoming infected with Eurocentric ideas, when they should be thinking globally.
The UK has opted out of the Erasmus student exchange programme with Europe, on the grounds that it is, allegedly, too expensive. (Perhaps too many people are using it?). It is to be replaced by a UK-only scheme yet to be devised, though they have, typically, already come up with a suitable name ('the Turing Programme) to enable British young people to study 'anywhere in the world' - Russia? China? Australia? Canada? the USA, even? Our government will be anxious to prevent the possibility of UK money being used to enable students from Europe to study here, but I am left wondering if there is some other reason to cut our noses off to spite our faces. Mr Rees-Mogg has doubtless warned the Cabinet of the dangerous spread of Jacobinism, and ministers will be alert to prevent our youngsters travelling to the Continent and becoming infected with Eurocentric ideas, when they should be thinking globally.
However the Republic of Ireland will extend its Erasmus funding to students in the North.
Bloody magnificent!
The UK has opted out of the Erasmus student exchange programme with Europe, on the grounds that it is, allegedly, too expensive. (Perhaps too many people are using it?). It is to be replaced by a UK-only scheme yet to be devised, though they have, typically, already come up with a suitable name ('the Turing Programme) to enable British young people to study 'anywhere in the world' - Russia? China? Australia? Canada? the USA, even? Our government will be anxious to prevent the possibility of UK money being used to enable students from Europe to study here, but I am left wondering if there is some other reason to cut our noses off to spite our faces. Mr Rees-Mogg has doubtless warned the Cabinet of the dangerous spread of Jacobinism, and ministers will be alert to prevent our youngsters travelling to the Continent and becoming infected with Eurocentric ideas, when they should be thinking globally.
However the Republic of Ireland will extend its Erasmus funding to students in the North.
Bloody magnificent!
Which is a natural extension of the GFAs principle of letting someone to claim British, Irish or both identities and to allow their sennse of identity to evolve over time.
Comments
Hehe, I've been trying to dig out the Prophecy of Nostracardus:
In fairness - and with the caveat that no-one has provided me with a bite-sized summary of the deal yet - it does seem like Boris hasn't quite conceded absolutely everything.
Meanwhile, at least Ursula von der Leyen can breathe a sigh of relief, and enjoy her (probably Covid-restricted) Christmas. She, and her staff, will have well and truly earned a respite...
We live in hope...
Meanwhile, let the Brexidiots have their moment of Pyrrhic *victory*...it won't last long.
Your fantasy NI house investment is still looking good - fancy letting it to me? I get the NHS plus an EHIC funded by Dublin, I can apply for an Irish passport after 5 years (even if I live in NI) and then wahey, my stolen EU citizen rights are restored!
The UK government's summary overview of the deal is annoying, because like many confessions of faith, what it omits to mention is more important than what it states.
It's taken me some reading around to realise that not only does NI remain part of the customs union, it also remains part of the Single Market. My conviction that the reunification of Ireland will occur in the long term has just been reinforced considerably. I wish I had the house to let you.
Meanwhile I see the Channel Islands are apparently going to be allowed to keep existing local fisheries agreements with France (and to have a say in agreeing to do so).
Overall, though, I agree with @quetzalcoatl that what we are looking at here is the embodiment of a parting of the ways. The Economist describes it as "as hard a Brexit as anything but no deal". I fully expect the UK to become even more of a foreign country to me in the future than it is now as a result.
This may be unfair but I imagine a limp, clammy handshake.
The salvation army does excellent work and is well worthy of my support.
And FRENCH firefighters.
And POLISH Territorial Defence Force staff.
The irony is exquisite, no?
Good job it's not 1st January, or they'd have been turned away, or shot at by gunboats...
I doubt if TSA has homophobia as an official policy or stance, as that would surely be illegal, but there are bound to be some homophobes within its ranks, as there are in ALL churches.
Indeed, but remember that even homophobes can do excellent work.
Back to Brexit. I expect many people feel some sort of relief after all the chaos of *negotiations*, and will want to move on...
I sort of hope that Labour will vote to support the *Deal*, but OTOH part of me hopes that at least some of the Opposition will abstain, just to show how unsatisfactory the whole thing is. YMMV.
My late mother, towards the end of her life, was an ‘adherent’ (not quite full member) of the SA and it gave her comfort and companionship. I also think that their work in society is genuine and non-judgemental, and is in many ways truly admirable.
As a gay man I would not feel comfortable attending, but that is no different to any conservative evangelical church - which would also make me uncomfortable.
Then there is their total lack of respect for volunteers and donations, for which I have only second-hand evidence, but still it all adds to a picture of an organisation for which some of the most stinging rebukes in the gospel seem to my mind to be made.
He will have a much larger and more influential group to work with, and this tiny sinking island off the coast of Europe will be of little interest or use to him...
Fair points. FWIW, I had an aged Aunt (deceased some 30 years ago), who was a life-long member of TSA. Her brother - My Old Dad - was impressed by her Christian witness, and that of TSA, to the extent that it was the only church for which he had any time, so to speak.
As regards donations, I do contribute to TSA online from time to time, and they are most punctilious and courteous in acknowledging same.
Mind you, having read what Thunderbunk and Pomona have said, I may well think about contributing to other groups - I have no time these days for homophobia in any form.
I am by no means an apologist for the SA, but single women can become officers in just the same way as single men. You are right, I think, in the fact that for senior appointments the ‘two-body-problem’ role is assigned to the woman in a married ministry team - both get appointments, but the woman gets a lesser one. It’s certainly not good, but might be a lesser evil than the unpaid/unofficial roles and duties historically placed on married women in, say, the CofE? I don’t know - there is a lot of inequality across most churches, I think.
However, can you point me to information about their lack of respect for volunteers and donations? Because of family connections (see earlier) I have donated to their social work in the past. Like BishopsFinger, I would like to avoid this in the future if there is bad practice.
(with apologies to readers for the tangent).
Personally, I'm nowadays inclined NOT to support any *Christian* group, because of the oft-found prejudices, homophobia etc. we're talking about tangentially (!). If anyone can suggest to me a suitable charity that is truly liberal and inclusive in its approach, please let me know...
Yes, in some top quality gas lighting, Mr. Gove said
Because of course, they couldn't have done anything about rampant inequality in the UK while we were in the EU. Even less so because the pesky EU kept spending EU funds on helpful development funds in deprived areas...
You have, however, raised an interesting point. I'll see how it goes, but it might be worth a separate thread (NOT bashing the Sally Army - just a general thread about non-judgemental charities...).
They are certainly socially conservative, but I have never heard any firsthand accounts of abusive or exclusionary behaviour in their charitable work in my local community.
I work in health and social care and you do get to hear about dodgy voluntary and private sector agencies but I have literally never, in the past 20 years I’ve worked in this field, heard anyone offline - lgbtq+ or otherwise - complain about them.
Why on earth do you think it's illegal for a church to believe that homosexuality is wrong?
Discrimination laws don't target belief.
And even when discrimination laws target action, they frequently have some sort of allowances for religious organisations.
Big headline in the Guardian morning about British fishermen feeling betrayed by the Brexit deal. That paper loving the opportunity to report dissatisfaction from people who have always been central to the Brexit narrative. Though it has to be said, having made so much of fishing rights over the last month, Johnson's only got himself to blame.
He won't blame himself, of course. That pesky EU, turning out to be in stronger position than us. Who knew?
Fishing has been allowed to assume a political significance out of all proportion to its economic value.
I didn't put it very well - I simply meant that if any church published discrimination officially, they would surely be breaking the law AFAIK.
I stand corrected.
I disagree with the last quoted part. There is also considerable meaning in being able to decide who can (and, more importantly, cannot) enter your territory.
I agree. It was the decision of the UK to make concessions as part of a trade deal.
And will in all probability enrich the pockets of a handful of donors.
The day of reckoning will come, hopefully, by which time their desert island luxury retreats may be under water, or otherwise rendered uninhabitable.
The day after they take up residence...
However the Republic of Ireland will extend its Erasmus funding to students in the North.
Bloody magnificent!
Which is a natural extension of the GFAs principle of letting someone to claim British, Irish or both identities and to allow their sennse of identity to evolve over time.
Or Ireland uniting?