[Politics] Brexit

[WATFORD zero]

"a" customs union was talked about as it was Corbyn/McDonnell's strategy, deliberately and carefully saying they wanted to remain in "a" customs union as an way to appear to appease everyone.

I thought I remembered quite a bit of talk about it early on from both sides, but I guess the ERG soon put paid to that

I should probably point out that '(AFAIK we can currently make deals with other countries outside the EU as long as the EU doesn't already have one, or negotiating one)' was referring to negotiating preferred WTO tariffs and quotas with WTO members. (Which can be done regardless of a Customs Union)

 

[seagulls4ever]

Anyone who belittles the opinions of others based on their appearance or complexion should not expect for their own opinions to be respected.

 

[WATFORD zero]

We wouldn't remain in the European customs union, as that's only available to member states. We'd only be in 'a' negotiated customs union, as per Turkey, in which free movement isn't insisted upon, it's negotiable.

That explains my memory of the THE/A bit

 

[ManOfSussex]

Are there any examples of countries that have completely free trade with the EU (including services) who don't also have free movement with the EU?

Yes - Fantasyland, La-la-land, Unicornia and The Kingdom of Reesmoggswana.

 

[Two Professors]

Sinn Fein telling truths, is that even possible with them.

Now Martin McGuiness has gone,who knows?

 

[Two Professors]

Anyone who belittles the opinions of others based on their appearance or complexion should not expect for their own opinions to be respected.

How about belittling people by their age,ethnicity,or politics?

 

[Triggaaar]

Yes - Fantasyland, La-la-land, Unicornia and The Kingdom of Reesmoggswana.

Right, so if we were to have free trade, we'd also have free movement. We wouldn't be in the Customs Union, but it would be the same.

 

[ManOfSussex]

Right, so if we were to have free trade, we'd also have free movement. We wouldn't be in the Customs Union, but it would be the same.

'A' customs union and free trade are not the same thing. Norway has full EEA access ie free trade with FOM, but is not in the customs union - the Swedish/Norwegian border closes at night as a result for example and proof of compliance with EEA rules of origin apply due to it's external customs regime - there are border checks. Turkey is an 'a' customs union but does not have FOM. 'A' UK wide customs union with the CTA for the purposes of the Irish border is a possible solution, but would require a lengthy, bespoke negotiation for an ultimate solution, with backstop applying until then. EEA membership with 'a' customs union, 'a' negotiated customs union on goods with regulatory alignment if the CTA can be upheld without full FOM applying as mentioned, sell Northern Ireland down the river or just call this whole charade off are the only solutions as far as I see it.

 

[Garry Nelson's teacher]

Does the parliamentary arithmetic favour


1. Corbin's model without agreement from May (would attract a lot of Tory Reminers)

or

2. May's model if she could get something to bring back on the backstop (might pull in enough Labour Leavers to get her over the line?)


3. Something else??


The problem is that Corbyn and May are both 'tribal' and will play to their own. This means that the 'something else' is unlikely to be a joint agreement that would potentially be THE option to get through the Commons, marginalising the Tory hard Brexiteers and the DUP. And it's got to be agreed by the EU. The key issue might well be what precisely is meant by 'a customs union'. If it's not the customs union it might just give May a bit of wiggle room? (But could she face the almost inevitable split in the Tory party that would follow?)

 

[beorhthelm]

the problem i see with Corbyn's position is it assumes agreement on lots of things the EU have previously said you cant have, or if looked more positive might be able to agree in the onward negotiation after withdrawal. its doesnt solve any of the issues blocking withdrawal. i dont know if this is misguided or intention to bring about postponement. meanwhile it completely ignores all the remainers (inherently assumes leaving), and his party's position, with his own side are deriding it because it breaks some promise from conference to have another vote

 

[KZNSeagull]

Does the parliamentary arithmetic favour


1. Corbin's model without agreement from May (would attract a lot of Tory Reminers)

or

2. May's model if she could get something to bring back on the backstop (might pull in enough Labour Leavers to get her over the line?)


3. Something else??


The problem is that Corbyn and May are both 'tribal' and will play to their own. This means that the 'something else' is unlikely to be a joint agreement that would potentially be THE option to get through the Commons, marginalising the Tory hard Brexiteers and the DUP. And it's got to be agreed by the EU. The key issue might well be what precisely is meant by 'a customs union'. If it's not the customs union it might just give May a bit of wiggle room? (But could she face the almost inevitable split in the Tory party that would follow?)

There are 2 different things here as far as I can see. Corbyn's model is for the future arrangement, May's plan is for the withdrawal agreement and the future arrangements within that are hazy to say the least. If May accepts Corbyn's model, does that mean that the Labour party will now vote for the withdrawal agreement? May has been reasonably clear in that the future arrangements are open to parliamentary discussion, but Corbyn's plan does not address the current and far more pressing issue of the withdrawal agreement.

 

[ManOfSussex]

Corbyn and May are finally coming under real pressure from external forces abroad now, not just from the differing tribes and voices within their own parties. They can't allow no deal to happen - the consequences are too great. The Withdrawal Agreement and Backstop are not going to be altered, so it's what can be worded and put the future declaration to kick the can down the road now, as far as I see it.

 

[Garry Nelson's teacher]

There are 2 different things here as far as I can see. Corbyn's model is for the future arrangement, May's plan is for the withdrawal agreement and the future arrangements within that are hazy to say the least. If May accepts Corbyn's model, does that mean that the Labour party will now vote for the withdrawal agreement? May has been reasonably clear in that the future arrangements are open to parliamentary discussion, but Corbyn's plan does not address the current and far more pressing issue of the withdrawal agreement.

As I see it, this 'plan' make the Withdrawal Agreement easier to swallow in one key way: it takes out the need for a 'backstop' as there'd be both regulatory alignment and some sort of customs arrangement between us the EU - specifically across the Irish border = no need for a hard border = no need for a back stop. Most of the details would be kicked down the road for the future agreement - with 2 years or so to get it sorted. So I'm not sure that the withdrawal agreement would be a huge roadblock...…….but there are many others of course.

 

[Garry Nelson's teacher]

Corbyn and May are finally coming under real pressure from external forces abroad now, not just from the differing tribes and voices within their own parties. They can't allow no deal to happen - the consequences are too great. The Withdrawal Agreement and Backstop are not going to be altered, so it's what can be worded and put the future declaration to kick the can down the road now, as far as I see it.

Pretty much agree. But maybe also put into the mix that the EU also 'can't allow no deal to happen' and will be minded to look for a pulse in a 'new deal' that is softer than May's current one? Wishful thinking perhaps...………..

Meanwhile, yet another practical consequence of no deal Brexit has come to light (it is truly the gift that keep on giving)

https://www.theguardian.com/busines...rters-risk-being-locked-out-of-world-harbours

 

[KZNSeagull]

As I see it, this 'plan' make the Withdrawal Agreement easier to swallow in one key way: it takes out the need for a 'backstop' as there'd be both regulatory alignment and some sort of customs arrangement between us the EU - specifically across the Irish border = no need for a hard border = no need for a back stop. Most of the details would be kicked down the road for the future agreement - with 2 years or so to get it sorted. So I'm not sure that the withdrawal agreement would be a huge roadblock...…….but there are many others of course.

The backstop would still be there though in case future negotiations do not go to plan. Any withdrawal agreement has to have this insurance policy in it, as I understand it anyway. May's deal has a customs union in it and I am not sure what differences there are between that and the current customs union, nor what specifically is in May's customs union that Corbyn objects to.

 

[Garry Nelson's teacher]

The backstop would still be there though in case future negotiations do not go to plan. Any withdrawal agreement has to have this insurance policy in it, as I understand it anyway. May's deal has a customs union in it and I am not sure what differences there are between that and the current customs union, nor what specifically is in May's customs union that Corbyn objects to.

Agree that 'back stop' will have to stay for the reasons you say. But May's current policy is simple 'no' to a customs union?

 

[KZNSeagull]

Agree that 'back stop' will have to stay for the reasons you say. But May's current policy is simple 'no' to a customs union?

Not sure it is. It is a "no" to the current Customs Union. Where May is a definite "no" is the single market as that is where free movement comes into play.

 

[ManOfSussex]

Pretty much agree. But maybe also put into the mix that the EU also 'can't allow no deal to happen' and will be minded to look for a pulse in a 'new deal' that is softer than May's current one? Wishful thinking perhaps...………..

Meanwhile, yet another practical consequence of no deal Brexit has come to light (it is truly the gift that keep on giving)

https://www.theguardian.com/busines...rters-risk-being-locked-out-of-world-harbours

Again, as I see it, that pulse is on the future declaration though. They have stated they will look favourably upon that if May's red lines are altered.

The Withdrawal Agreement and Backstop, that we formulated and agreed to don't forget, are set in stone. Dublin have the full support of Brussels on that and they're singing from the same hymn sheet. Meanwhile Dublin are now having talks on Capitol Hill telling them about what the Brits/Tans/God damn Limeys are trying to do to them now with Brexit and how we've gone back on our word on the Backstop and what we signed in the 1990's.......................

 

[Thunder Bolt]

If it happens, it could be the moment that snaps some of the leave supporters out of their trance. There was quite a big moment for the Trump enchanted yesterday, many of his supporters got their tax bills and were not pleased.
My reckoning is that those most enchanted with Leave, believe that it will be good for them, even if it is bad for the country as a whole, when it becomes apparent that they get screwed too, they might have to admit they were conned at last. There is a selfishness about the leave proposition and it's supporters, I don't think there is as much will to struggle personally for the greater good as they like to make out.

They've started complaining already

[tweet]1093061819541979136[/tweet]

 

[Ernest]

Seems to me there are some on both sides so entrenched in their positions, ERG and Peoples Vote that it's going to be very difficult to have any kind of deal