To Brexit

[Lovera]

I do not think it useful to dwell longer on the talking of two terms having the same meaning. Instead, it is better to stay more detached to avoid the risk of losing the overall vision.

[Lovera]

For the sake of truth this term "standstill" is used in the article "How Boris Johnson plans to deliver Brexit in 100 days" :https://www.stuff.co...xit-in-100-days

[Lovera]

What may not have been well considered is the persuasive force of the diplomatic weapon. It may be interesting to hear what Sir Malcom Rifkind said at a conference in 2017:

 

and what he said today (on SkyNews in "Sophie Ridge on Sunday"):https://youtu.be/1-YONhd_tDI

[Gerben42]

UK is making a big mistake not accepting May's deal. It was better as they could ever have expected. Johnson who rejects the deal basically has the choice between "No Deal" and "No Johnson". Although discussion is still going on, as most MPs will rather saw off their foot than have "No Deal", it is quite clear that they will get rid of Johnson in time. Quite surprising that he took the job in the first place. What people do just to be on the list of former prime ministers...

 

With Johnson gone, there will be a vote between "repeal article 50" and "May's deal Brexit"... "Repeal" might just mean that UK will file Brexit again at a later time, just to get two more years out of the EU, but I feel that there is a less than 1% chance of a "No Deal" Brexit. Just too many people who don't want that.

[Cyberyeti]

UK is making a big mistake not accepting May's deal. It was better as they could ever have expected.

 

In what way ? It was basically accepting what the EU wanted, and not really a Brexit at all given that the EU can keep the UK in the EU indefinitely.

[Lovera]

You may be led to think that both P.M. May and then Johnson were not well supported by a legal law consultant team for the evaluation of a correct draft of this contract (without wishing to reach the judiciary that determines its validity or not).

[Zelandakh]

You may be led to think that both P.M. May and then Johnson were not well supported by a legal law consultant team

And you would be wrong. The British government has an excellent legal team available.

[cherdano]

In what way ? It was basically accepting what the EU wanted, and not really a Brexit at all given that the EU can keep the UK in the EU indefinitely.

This is a persistent myth, but it is myth - very wrong indeed. The EU didn't want a UK-wide backstop. And in fact it is quite a concession by the EU as it could reasonably be interpreted as cherry-picking among the "four freedoms", which the EU absolutely did not want.

May's negotiating team was very successful, it just turned out that parliament didn't agree with the goal of the negotiation.

 

The problem here is not the EU, it's the UK. Because the UK does not know what it wants - not parliament, not government, and certainly not the public.

[shyams]

This is a persistent myth, but it is myth - very wrong indeed. The EU didn't want a UK-wide backstop. And in fact it is quite a concession by the EU as it could reasonably be interpreted as cherry-picking among the "four freedoms", which the EU absolutely did not want.

May's negotiating team was very successful, it just turned out that parliament didn't agree with the goal of the negotiation.

 

The problem here is not the EU, it's the UK. Because the UK does not know what it wants - not parliament, not government, and certainly not the public

I agree. The UK is almost entirely responsible for this mess. The backstop was mostly put in place based on a UK demand; news at that time featured videos of EU negotiators saying that they "agreed to the backstop because the UK Govt. needs it to maintain the Good Friday agreement".

 

The UK Govt. has never been clear what they want and how they will (try to) make a success our of Brexit. At all points in the negotiation, it appeared like the EU negotiators knew what they were doing, how they wanted to negotiate and what their expectations were. In contrast, the UK negotiators never once appeared like they knew what they were doing or why they were even there.

 

*** "Brexit means Brexit"

*** "Red White and Blue Brexit"

*** "Right deal for the United Kingdom is also the right deal for the EU"

*** "We import more than we export -- the German automobile industry will force EU to negotiate a deal"

are all myths perpetuated by our political class who never had a clue on what Brexit should mean. We now have reached a stage where domiciled EU nationals' rights are being jeopardised by the perfidy of our Home Secretary.

[Lovera]

https://www.theguard...-jibe-live-news

Here the press conference in Berlin between Merkel and Johnson:https://youtu.be/ObyAIoeyTM8

[Cyberyeti]

This is a persistent myth, but it is myth - very wrong indeed. The EU didn't want a UK-wide backstop. And in fact it is quite a concession by the EU as it could reasonably be interpreted as cherry-picking among the "four freedoms", which the EU absolutely did not want.

May's negotiating team was very successful, it just turned out that parliament didn't agree with the goal of the negotiation.

 

The problem here is not the EU, it's the UK. Because the UK does not know what it wants - not parliament, not government, and certainly not the public.

 

No, May was always a remainer and never wanted to leave and this was sabotaging Brexit because she KNEW is would never get past some conservatives and the DUP.

[fromageGB]

... With Johnson gone, there will be a vote between "repeal article 50" and "May's deal Brexit"... "Repeal" might just mean that UK will file Brexit again at a later time, just to get two more years out of the EU, but I feel that there is a less than 1% chance of a "No Deal" Brexit. Just too many people who don't want that.

Not as I understand. If Johnson goes, as things stand it will be a Labour led government with Corbyn as prime minister. Where does your "too many people don't want it" (no deal) come from? Less than a week ago it was reported (https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2019/08/17/britain-would-prefer-no-deal-brexit-jeremy-corbyn-government) that a YouGov poll found "Nearly half of the public - 48 per cent - said they would prefer to see the country crash out of the EU than the Labour leader implement his own approach to Brexit" with 48% in favour of no deal, and 35% in favour of Corbyn, who has eventually agreed a policy of a second referendum.

 

That's a pretty decisive margin, and it is not Labour policy to either repeal article 50 or accept May's deal.

 

However, unfortunately it is looking as if Boris is trying to resurrect the May agreement, with added tweaks. I really hope he does not succeed.

[Cyberyeti]

Not as I understand. If Johnson goes, as things stand it will be a Labour led government with Corbyn as prime minister. Where does your "too many people don't want it" (no deal) come from? Less than a week ago it was reported (https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2019/08/17/britain-would-prefer-no-deal-brexit-jeremy-corbyn-government) that a YouGov poll found "Nearly half of the public - 48 per cent - said they would prefer to see the country crash out of the EU than the Labour leader implement his own approach to Brexit" with 48% in favour of no deal, and 35% in favour of Corbyn, who has eventually agreed a policy of a second referendum.

 

That's a pretty decisive margin, and it is not Labour policy to either repeal article 50 or accept May's deal.

 

However, unfortunately it is looking as if Boris is trying to resurrect the May agreement, with added tweaks. I really hope he does not succeed.

 

Except that the danger is that Corbyn can't get a confidence vote through either, a general election is called and we leave with no deal before we have a government.

[Lovera]

6h ago15:36

 

 

"Boris Johnson says people 'shouldn't get hopes up too soon' about prospects of Brexit deal

Boris Johnson has played down hopes of an early breakthrough in talks with the EU intended to resolve the Brexit crisis. In comments that suggest he thinks some of the reporting of what he achieved this week has been over-optimistic, he said that while the "mood music" when he visited Berlin and Paris was "very good", people "shouldn't necessarily get their hopes up too soon".

 

Speaking to reporters on a visit to Devon, he said:

 

[Angela Merkel and Emmanuel Macron] could see that we want a deal, they can see the problems with the backstop. Clearly Angela Merkel thinks that the solutions can be found within 30 days - actually what she meant was if you can do it in two years you can certainly do it in 30 days.

 

But I want to caution everybody, OK? Because this is not going to be a cinch, this is not going to be easy. We will have to work very hard to get this thing done ...

 

We have to have an arrangement that allows the whole UK to come out of the EU and have frictionless trade at the border in Northern Ireland. There are lots of ways that we can make sure that happens. But to persuade our EU friends and partners, who are very, very, very hard over against it, will take some time ...

 

I'm afraid we will have to prepare to come out without an agreement and we can do that, we are very confident that we will be OK because we will have all sorts of preparations in place.

 

We are making progress but I am just telling people not to hold their breath, because I have seen the way these Brussels negotiations work.

 

Johnson said that it was "always on the steps of the court, as it were, that the deal is done". He went on:

 

I must urge people - we are going to be working very hard on this but they shouldn't necessarily get their hopes up too soon."

[From The Guardian on Fri 23 Aug 2019]

- But so we are on the point again, although.

[fromageGB]

Except that the danger is that Corbyn can't get a confidence vote through either, a general election is called and we leave with no deal before we have a government.

I wouldn't call that a danger, I call it success.

[hrothgar]

I wouldn't call that a danger, I call it success.

 

Seldom do you see a person so eager to shoot themselves in the head

[Cyberyeti]

I wouldn't call that a danger, I call it success.

 

No deal now is going to be a mess. A no deal declared at the start with at least 2 years to negotiate some of the easy things would have been the best solution as the best qualified man to say this (Varoufakis) did indeed say at the time.

[fromageGB]

I do agree that it would be messy, and not the way we should have done things, but given where we are now, and the poor alternatives ahead of us, I think this would be the best choice. I prefer it to a Jeremy Corbyn government probably remaining in the EU; I prefer it to another endless decision to postpone the decision.

 

If we leave with no agreement on future EU trading arrangements I think we (most people) will survive not uncomfortably, and trade agreement with the EU will surely follow at some time. If we happen to be between governments at the time I believe the public may well be so relieved it is finally over, that Boris Johnson will gain a surge as well as the Brexit party supporters, sufficient to win the election and carry on the good work.

 

But that is not my prognosis. My opinion is that Boris will agree a fudge to the May plan, and leave in name but not in practice, still being subject to EU law, still bankrolling the EU, with continuing EU-imposed tariffs on outside trade, for a possibly 2-year extension. My worry is that during that 2 years there will be sufficient lack of support from brexit thinkers and non-conservatives to bring him down, and we end up with May and Hammond again, or a LibLab coalition. Either way remaining in the EU permanently. I do not want this either. The no agreement scenario seems preferable to me.

[cherdano]

still being subject to EU law

Can you name one EU law that has ever inconvenienced you?

Meanwhile, do you ever travel to EU countries outside the UK?

[hrothgar]

Can you name one EU law that has ever inconvenienced you?

Meanwhile, do you ever travel to EU countries outside the UK?

 

And, of course, how much are you willing to see the standard of living collapse in the Britain to avoid these odious laws?

[Cyberyeti]

And, of course, how much are you willing to see the standard of living collapse in the Britain to avoid these odious laws?

 

Collapse is not a price worth paying, but not sure that will happen, there are some factors that will improve (the EU has some nasty tariffs to protect southern European agriculture which we'll lose), but prepared for a small drop. The question is how bad it will be, and it's somewhere between project fear's apocalypse and the Brexiteers' "no issue", the question is where.

[hrothgar]

Collapse is not a price worth paying, but not sure that will happen, there are some factors that will improve (the EU has some nasty tariffs to protect southern European agriculture which we'll lose), but prepared for a small drop. The question is how bad it will be, and it's somewhere between project fear's apocalypse and the Brexiteers' "no issue", the question is where.

 

Perhaps...

 

Me, I think it's stupid to place bets with a very real chance of a big down side and very little in the way of perceptible gains.

 

I hope for the sake of the sane folks on your benighted island that you are correct.

And if you are wrong, I hope that the figure out a way to make you bear the costs for your decision.

[Lovera]

The scenario that currently lies ahead is so rough that it is appropriate to wait to make things settle and have a clearer vision of the future. Of course everyone (from political figures to interested citizens) does not want or think they want to pay that much and behave accordingly. Suffice it to say that the only volume of business that gravitates around London is so high that the negative impact will be considerable.

[cherdano]

Can you name one EU law that has ever inconvenienced you?

Meanwhile, do you ever travel to EU countries outside the UK?

Still wondering about this. After all, it would be nice to know that fromageGB's opposition to the EU is based on concrete specific objections, not on a general distaste for having people like me in his country, who can come here with no restrictions if they take on a job...

[Cyberyeti]

Still wondering about this. After all, it would be nice to know that fromageGB's opposition to the EU is based on concrete specific objections, not on a general distaste for having people like me in his country, who can come here with no restrictions if they take on a job...

 

Not a law as such but a trade treaty makes me pay more for my orange juice than I need to. There's a 15%? tariff on North African orange juice to protect Spanish farmers.