[Politics] Brexit

[KZNSeagull]

Neither are required..... Really. The whole backstop Irish Border issue, whilst of huge importance, is not based on anything to do with trade barriers, nor border posts. Its all about politics, its not needed and in the last week you would have seen a lot of articles that state, that in the event of what is branded as "no deal", the Irish and the EU are already planning for there not to be any physical border post controls. The UK always insisted they would never, the intransigence about it was always from the Irish/EU side.

When the UK came along with the malthouse compromise which showed clearly that technology could be used to do any checks away from the border, as is done successfully on the huge border between Norway and Sweden, the EU said they "didn't understand" our request and that it was "impossible", but lo and behold that is the exact plan they have on the event of no deal. Its wise to cut through the soundbites and statements in the press to the real substance. There wont be any controls on the border in any situation. But for pressure/leverage, and to ensure the EU keep the upper hand in any furture relationship talks (as they hold the veto to us leaving the terrible WA customs union backstop), they will not entertain changing it citing "movement of trade" "need to enforce border in event of no deal" but its all bull5hit.

http://www.cityam.com/275222/uk-and-ireland-talks-avoid-hard-border-no-deal-brexit

https://www.rte.ie/news/brexit/2019/0330/1039592-brexit-ireland/

Im not a hard brexiteer, but the customs union is a terrible idea,it takes away some of the biggest advantages of being outside the EU , in curtailing our ability to trade independently with the booming other 90% of the globe. In the customs Union the EU sell access to UK markets to the rest of the world and we can cut no deals. Within the EU much of the single/market customs union policy is based on (imho) the failed industrial/protectionist policies of the French. I honestly believe the customs union enthusiasts (whom are remainers) propose this a a halfway house to get fully back in. The one thing they really dont want is for Britain to sign trade deals with the US/China etc and to forge ahead, then there would never be any going back. A successful free trading UK on the doorstep of the EU is the worse thing that could happen to a pro EU fanatic, it would be the worst example to others thinking of leaving. Customs Union prevents that, and is the biggest hook to try and prevent the UK from slipping from the EU's orbit, thus why the backstop, with the only way out at the EU's discretion, is non negotiable to the EU. Its not an insurance policy, its a bridge to a permanent customs union and ensuring the UK's trading wings are permanently clipped.

I was actually quite content in the indicative votes with the Norway, EEA, Efta (without customs union) proposal, as it would give us access to single market (a far bigger bonus than customs union), it would fulfill my number 1 objective to get out of the political union (wanted no part in a future US of Europe), would allow us an emergency break to control immigration (if the numbers were proven to be excessive - as Lichenstein uses), would limit EU free movement migration to work based type entry and not to anyone, it would also allow us to trade with the world (though regulatory alignment with the EU is required) and like Norway, we could VETO EU directives, if we chose that were not in our interest (which is considerable as in the EU our national interest was on the losing side of EU wide majority votes over 70% of the time). And we'd pay in about 2/3 of what we do today. People say "you'll be rule takers not makers", we would be outside the political union and even when in, our main function was not as a rule maker but as a blocking vote with the more liberal free market economies Germany, Holland, Sweden and Denmark against the French dominated directional attempts within the EU.

Here is pretty good graphic that shows various options for/against.

View attachment 106843

Within the Withdrawal Agreement there are elements of a customs union but not all of the elements of THE Customs Union, which allows us to do our our trade agreements. I do not know enough about this, but is that not an option for a permanent arrangement with the EU?

 

[portlock seagull]

Some complete idiot on LBC last week called in with a solution to the Irish border problem........ For the UK to invade Ireland!

Old skool?

 

[vegster]

To force the DUP into line. She’ll argue that if there’s a GE they could lose the current power and influence they’re enjoying .

However, May herself will certainly lose her current power and be replaced as Tory leader or by JC as new PM. Very few opportunities to top up her pension scheme left I fear.

 

[WATFORD zero]

Neither are required..... Really. The whole backstop Irish Border issue, whilst of huge importance, is not based on anything to do with trade barriers, nor border posts. Its all about politics, its not needed and in the last week you would have seen a lot of articles that state, that in the event of what is branded as "no deal", the Irish and the EU are already planning for there not to be any physical border post controls. The UK always insisted they would never, the intransigence about it was always from the Irish/EU side.

When the UK came along with the malthouse compromise which showed clearly that technology could be used to do any checks away from the border, as is done successfully on the huge border between Norway and Sweden, the EU said they "didn't understand" our request and that it was "impossible", but lo and behold that is the exact plan they have on the event of no deal. Its wise to cut through the soundbites and statements in the press to the real substance. There wont be any controls on the border in any situation. But for pressure/leverage, and to ensure the EU keep the upper hand in any furture relationship talks (as they hold the veto to us leaving the terrible WA customs union backstop), they will not entertain changing it citing "movement of trade" "need to enforce border in event of no deal" but its all bull5hit.

http://www.cityam.com/275222/uk-and-ireland-talks-avoid-hard-border-no-deal-brexit

https://www.rte.ie/news/brexit/2019/0330/1039592-brexit-ireland/

Im not a hard brexiteer, but the customs union is a terrible idea,it takes away some of the biggest advantages of being outside the EU , in curtailing our ability to trade independently with the booming other 90% of the globe. In the customs Union the EU sell access to UK markets to the rest of the world and we can cut no deals. Within the EU much of the single/market customs union policy is based on (imho) the failed industrial/protectionist policies of the French. I honestly believe the customs union enthusiasts (whom are remainers) propose this a a halfway house to get fully back in. The one thing they really dont want is for Britain to sign trade deals with the US/China etc and to forge ahead, then there would never be any going back. A successful free trading UK on the doorstep of the EU is the worse thing that could happen to a pro EU fanatic, it would be the worst example to others thinking of leaving. Customs Union prevents that, and is the biggest hook to try and prevent the UK from slipping from the EU's orbit, thus why the backstop, with the only way out at the EU's discretion, is non negotiable to the EU. Its not an insurance policy, its a bridge to a permanent customs union and ensuring the UK's trading wings are permanently clipped.

I was actually quite content in the indicative votes with the Norway, EEA, Efta (without customs union) proposal, as it would give us access to single market (a far bigger bonus than customs union), it would fulfill my number 1 objective to get out of the political union (wanted no part in a future US of Europe), would allow us an emergency break to control immigration (if the numbers were proven to be excessive - as Lichenstein uses), would limit EU free movement migration to work based type entry and not to anyone, it would also allow us to trade with the world (though regulatory alignment with the EU is required) and like Norway, we could VETO EU directives, if we chose that were not in our interest (which is considerable as in the EU our national interest was on the losing side of EU wide majority votes over 70% of the time). And we'd pay in about 2/3 of what we do today. People say "you'll be rule takers not makers", we would be outside the political union and even when in, our main function was not as a rule maker but as a blocking vote with the more liberal free market economies Germany, Holland, Sweden and Denmark against the French dominated directional attempts within the EU.

Here is pretty good graphic that shows various options for/against.

View attachment 106843

Thanks very much for your detailed answer. (Sorry it has taken so long to respond - Mother's day duties !).

I do believe that their is a fundamental error in your response, and that is the use of technology to resolve the 'no border' issue. The UK government have been trying to find this magic bullet solution to the Ireland/NI issue for the last 3 years, and because there isn't one, they have tried to push the issue back by another two years and re-brand it 'the backstop'.

Indeed, the Malthouse Compromise “provides for exit from the EU on time with a new backstop, which would be acceptable indefinitely, but which incentivises us all to reach a new future relationship. It ensures there is no need for a hard border with Ireland. It would allow the prime minister to renegotiate the backstop element of her Brexit deal to replace it with a free trade agreement with as-yet-unknown technology to avoid customs checks on the Irish border."

It's really not any sort of solution, it's just a wish list.

The Norway/Sweden 'solution' has been in place for the whole of those 3 years and has never been considered as a practical solution throughout that time. Amongst the significant issues with this 'solution' are both volumes and operation of the technology which mean that is completely impractical for the NI/Ireland border. If it was possible to use this 'solution', surely Theresa May or her team, (no matter how incompetent you think they are), would have used this and avoided creating 'the backstop' being defeated three times in Parliament, etc etc ?

I'm sorry but until someone comes up with the as-yet-unknown technology it's still Customs Union or Hard Border. In the words of someone or other 'Nothing has changed' since the day after the referendum.

You may have missed the links earlier but here is the European Commission's chief spokesman making it clear that there would have to be a hard border

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-46961982

And here is what Angela Merkel is up to

Angela Merkel will travel to Dublin on Thursday to deliver a blunt warning to the Irish government that the time for avoiding the border question is over. In a no-deal scenario, Dublin will be forced to control the entry of goods into the single market from Northern Ireland.

“They’ve done nothing so far,” said a senior EU diplomat. “It can’t continue like this. It doesn’t mean walls on the border but action has to be taken. In the end, you can’t escape reality.”

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/news/eu-braces-itself-for-a-wrecking-ball-brexit-as-it-blames-political-meltdown-in-london-c0f098zbz

Now we all know that Britain and Ireland are both saying they don't want a hard border (which is what you're two linked articles say). However, if we have learnt one thing in the last 3 years, it's that what people want and what is actually implementable are two completely different things.

If, of course, you can ever trust a politician

 

[WATFORD zero]

Hello two professors, I am not in the lobby of insulting or denigrating any on here who post flippant comments and do not intend to start now, however, I trust this post was made completely tongue in cheek? if not then just WOW!

Well to be fair to Two Profs (and I'm not normally one to sing his praises), but 'the Republic rejoining the United Kingdom' is more historically accurate than his friend [MENTION=1365]Westdene Seagull[/MENTION]'s solution of 'Give NI back to Ireland'

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

Well to be fair to Two Profs (and I'm not normally one to sing his praises), but 'the Republic rejoining the United Kingdom' is more historically accurate than his friend [MENTION=1365]Westdene Seagull[/MENTION]'s solution of 'Give NI back to Ireland'

I guess if you talk enough nonsense eventually you will stumble upon some wisdom. Monkeys and typewriters etc.

 

[ManOfSussex]

Neither. You had better tell the EU to hurry up and start building some checkpoints then and to stop talking to the Irish government about third options.

The same place as your mythical WTO border enforcement police?

I like you Footy Genius. I know I'm British and you're a Little Englander - but I like you.

 

[daveinplzen]

#everybodyelse'sfault

 

[Stat Brother]

Some complete idiot on LBC last week called in with a solution to the Irish border problem........ For the UK to invade Ireland!

Attacking someone else...




...least we know it wasn't Hughton.

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

I like you Footy Genius. I know I'm British and you're a Little Englander - but I like you.

Do you? You weirdo. I don't.

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

Attacking someone else...




...least we know it wasn't Hughton.

I shouldn't, I really shouldn't, but

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

Labour and conservative numbers simply CAN NOT be that high! Both pols but them combines at around 70%! With 48% of people, at least anti-brexit, how on earth can the two main pro-brexit parties have that much of the vote share!?
Either that or there are a lot of hypocritical voters out there.

As Douglas Adams wrote, and I have paraphrased many times, if you don't vote for a political arse, the wrong political arse will get in.

 

[Two Professors]

Hello two professors, I am not in the lobby of insulting or denigrating any on here who post flippant comments and do not intend to start now, however, I trust this post was made completely tongue in cheek? if not then just WOW!

Somewhat tongue-in-cheek,yes.Although if Eire rejoined the Commonwealth it might lead to a solution.Thanks for the lack of insults or denigration.Politeness and manners are very rare in the runners-up enclosure.

 

[Two Professors]

I shouldn't, I really shouldn't, but

It's talking to itself,one assumes.Surprised it hasn't put itself on ignore.

Let's hope May finally sees the light and clears off next week.Even the EU have finished their No Deal preparations.Time to go.

 

[pastafarian]

So you don't believe democracy should allow people to change their mind?

Can you name one person on here who has said the country should not be allowed to change its mind in the future and democratically choose to rejoin the EU after we have left? Anyone at all?
If in the future when we are outside the EU and if in the future there is a parliament with a large number of MPs who are happy with the status quo of being outside the EU what would you suggest happen if there is a referendum to rejoin the EU and rejoin the EU wins.

Should the result of that referendum to rejoin be enacted and we rejoin the EU?
Or could that current parliament say sod that, put a few spanners in the works and try to manipulate it so we stay out as much as possible and don’t really rejoin. Or perhaps try and push it so the public get told to vote again, just to make sure and because some rejoin voters have died since the vote. Or maybe they could say the winning rejoin vote is all a bit difficult, doesn’t take into account enough the wishes of those that wanted to stay out, so lets just revoke our application to join and call the whole thing off.

Careful what you wish for.

Being pedantic, it is at the end of Downing Street as there are wrought iron gates across the end so nobody can get anywhere near numbers 10 & 11. It's been like that since the IRA days.

If you are doing pedantic properly,the gates since the IRA days are steel and not wrought iron.
http://www.downing.st/

 

[clapham_gull]

Someone is in denial.

Denial of what ? Read my previous posts. I'm very pragmatic about the whole thing and confident in the belief that your view of the world is very very much in the minority in this country. We are better than that.

You need to separate why people voted leave from certain politicians (and yourself) you have a very different agenda. Getting rid of the EU (which I can't stand) is a means to an end.

History will look back at the alt-right as a failure. It simply feeds on discontent.

 

[CHAPPERS]

https://www.theguardian.com/politic...ve-eu-by-22-may-if-mps-vote-for-customs-union

The writing into the deal of a customs union, an idea tabled by the former Conservative chancellor Ken Clarke, lost by only eight votes when it was voted upon last Monday along side seven other ways forward, with both the SNP and the Liberal Democrats abstaining.

“The eight proposals that were rejected earlier will now be limited and combined with each other and this can be voted on Monday and possibly Wednesday,” Guy Verhofstadt, the European parliament’s Brexit coordinator, told the Belgian radio station VRT.

“There was almost a majority in favour of a customs union with the EU. What we expect is that a proposal could reach a majority around the customs union and then we are prepared, on the EU side, to renegotiate the declaration and to include that customs union therein,” he added.

Verhofstadt went on to describe the prospect of a lengthy extension of article 50, and the need for British MEPs, as “disastrous” but still avoidable.

He said: “If that political statement is adjusted, I think a majority can be found in the British House of Commons, because you will get cross-border cooperation between Labor and the Conservatives.

“That new political statement can then be approved at a European summit on 10 April and then we will give the British the opportunity to formalise it in English legislation by 22 May”.

Customs Union and a fracture of the Conservative Party wouldn't be a total disaster, considering where we are.

 

[Lincoln Imp]

Can you name one person on here who has said the country should not be allowed to change its mind in the future and democratically choose to rejoin the EU after we have left? Anyone at all?
If in the future when we are outside the EU and if in the future there is a parliament with a large number of MPs who are happy with the status quo of being outside the EU what would you suggest happen if there is a referendum to rejoin the EU and rejoin the EU wins.

Should the result of that referendum to rejoin be enacted and we rejoin the EU?
Or could that current parliament say sod that, put a few spanners in the works and try to manipulate it so we stay out as much as possible and don’t really rejoin. Or perhaps try and push it so the public get told to vote again, just to make sure and because some rejoin voters have died since the vote. Or maybe they could say the winning rejoin vote is all a bit difficult, doesn’t take into account enough the wishes of those that wanted to stay out, so lets just revoke our application to join and call the whole thing off.
]

Like much of the NSC Brexit debate, this part of the discussion is now entirely circular.

The argument in favour of confirmatory vote is that the public was sold an unachievable fantasy in 2016; a have our cake and eat it Brexit which would give us the benefits of EU membership plus freedom from its obligations, this being made made possible by the fact that The EU needs us more than we need them. These weren't daft lies round the edge of the sales pitch - they were absolutely central to the Brexit offer. And they weren't true.

The only versions of Brexit that are actually available in the real world are a soft version and a hard no-deal version. (Known as 'slave state' and 'virtually eliminate manufacturing' to some of their supporters.)

I am not sitting here criticising either of them but what is undeniable that those two animals are very different beasts. I believe you would claim that people who support one would naturally support the other. To me, that's similar to saying that a parent would as happily watch their child cuddle a pit-bull as a cockapoo on the basis that both are dogs and it was a dog rather than a cat that the family voted to have.

Many of us, perhaps a majority now, think it would be reasonable to ask the public to confirm that that is the case, given that the product they were invited to buy has clearly never existed and the two currently in the frame are chalk and cheese.

I don't want to be disrespectful (weasel loons never are!) but your argument looks, as it always has done, like expediency dressed up as principle.

 

[Blue Valkyrie]

I think we need to pass the withdrawal agreement, and tweak the political declaration to include a desire for EFTA and EEA membership.

Of course, after a General Election the political declaration could be torn up.

This would be fair enough. It would not be 'fair enough' if a replacement for May tore up the declaration without holding a new General Election.



Please - no new referendum - just giving us more lies, division, and poison.

 

[Cozzy]

Leave the EU Without a deal on April 12th Petition

I know I know before you all start this is just to balance it out as it was posted about the revoke vote this is so anyone interested gets the information they may or may not wish to have

https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/248281

I believe there are other Brexit related petitions available if you search for them.