Brexit What Happens Next Thread ---multiple merged threads.

[Confusion of VIs]

9 hours ago, copydude said:

It depends what you mean by closer union. But certainly, sacred principles of the EU, such as FOM and the single currency, are being proved unworkable. 

As discussed earlier, there's endless chat about racism and multicuturalism but the demographic meltdown brought about by FOM to Eastern European countries is far more damaging. 

FOM is not unworkable in the longer term. The recent/current stresses were caused by the expansion into Eastern Europe, the surge in migration caused by this is almost over and migration will be back in balance by the time we actually stop FOM.

It's true that FOM has proved to be a double edged sword for the EE countries, in the early days it was welcomed but now almost all of the EE states are actively encouraging their citizens to come home and the rising living standards are making this attractive for skilled people.

Brexit will prove to be the worlds most expensive ever stable door bolting exercise.  

You might be right about the Euro proving to be unworkable but leaving the EU will not protect us from the effects of a break up and having to contribute to what will be the biggest bail out in history. 

[rockerboy]

The UK can no longer practise a foreign policy "siding with the weakest". It was something the UK did for hundreds of years to successfully balance forces across mainland Europe, but now the UK is caught out - it has to deal with a single abstract entity of "Brussels" with the concept of "EU leaders " (which as everyone knows is an abortion of good intentions).

The real power of Europe (headed by Germany/France) has no interest in the UK other than ripping off meaty chunks of the Uk's natural interests (Sea) and Financial industry - Its time to get real here - The UK is not and never has been a strategic member of the club, other than for what the UK has offered in the past as a market for European companies to exploit.

It all looks a bit shit no matter what happens

 

[Quicken]

34 minutes ago, thehowler said:

After they'd said there could be substantive renegotiation of the WA.

So they said no. And then they said, what next, and she said there is no next.

Who said the bolded? I thought everyone made it very clear that they couldn't change the WA at all.

Edited December 14, 2018 by Quicken

[Bruce Banner]

"Through a glass, darkly."

Says it all really.

[Confusion of VIs]

11 hours ago, Sledgehead said:

The EU was never going to be our ally in Brexit. Indeed they have proven themselves quite hostile. And now we find they have designs on our territory: N.I.

If similar intentions were prosecuted by force, and a serving PM had knowingly left the country as ill-prepared as we supposedly now find ourselves, they would almost certainly be serving a life sentence.

 

Why on earth would anyone have expected the EU to be our ally in Brexit, that would surely be taking naivety to a new level. The UK outside of the EU is a competitor not a friend. The EU has simply applied the rules, as they said they would from the outset. It is the UK's intentions/red lines that are the problem and we are exactly where we were always going to end up, with a very bad deal.

There never was a good Brexit to be had, now we can either grow up and accept the deal or inflict massively more damage on ourselves by going for the far worse WTO option. 

 

[Quicken]

Quote

The British government is seeking to place a duty on both sides to try and get out of the Irish backstop within 12 months of it coming into force, a proposal supported by Germany’s Angela Merkel and the Austrian chancellor, Sebastian Kurz.how

But it was opposed by Ireland, France, Sweden, Spain and Belgium, who voiced doubts that May would be able to sell the technical concession to hostile MPs in Westminster.

The summit communique published on Thursday night was less generous to May than earlier drafts. Irish objections had resulted in the removal of a phrase that the EU “stands ready to examine whether any further assurance can be provided” on the backstop. Wording that the backstop would not be “a desirable outcome” was also cut from the text.

Leo Varadkar, the Irish taoiseach, said he was “very satisfied” with the statement 

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/dec/14/eu-leaders-tell-may-to-find-brexit-consensus-among-mps

There seems to be this idea going round the thread that it is Brussels, or 'the EU' driving the agenda. Here, we see specific states within the EU27 driving the agenda. If anyone expected Ireland to defend it's interests less energetically than say the DUP, why was that?

Edited December 14, 2018 by Quicken
wrong link

[Bruce Banner]

5 minutes ago, Confusion of VIs said:

Why on earth would anyone have expected the EU to be our ally in Brexit, that would surely be taking naivety to a new level. The UK outside of the EU is a competitor not a friend. The EU has simply applied the rules, as they said they would from the outset. It is the UK's intentions/red lines that are the problem and we are exactly where we were always going to end up, with a very bad deal.

There never was a good Brexit to be had, now we can either grow up and accept the deal or inflict massively more damage on ourselves by going for the far worse WTO option. 

 

Or we could grow up and accept that the only way forward is to hold a second referendum (on whatever you like to call it).

[yelims]

[Sheeple Splinter]

16 hours ago, IMHAL said:

I'm really sorry, you have lost me. Care to summarise your point? 

No need... just click on the return arrow to go back to my post about incompetent MP's.

[Confusion of VIs]

2 hours ago, onlooker said:

It is normal negotiating practice to try to get the other side to make an offer first. The technique is to get the other side to blink first. May and Robbins are useless at carrying it out because they have already given away the endgame.

 It's a commonly held belief but not actual true.

A trained negotiator will try to shape the negotiation by being first to state his demands, couched as an offer. Olly Robbins is regarded as a very good and hard negotiator.

The problem is this was never a negotiation, it was a process to be gone through and has produced exactly the intended result.     

[Bruce Banner]

8 minutes ago, Confusion of VIs said:

 It's a commonly held belief but not actual true.

A trained negotiator will try to shape the negotiation by being first to state his demands, couched as an offer. Olly Robbins is regarded as a very good and hard negotiator.

The problem is this was never a negotiation, it was a process to be gone through and has produced exactly the intended result.     

By whom?

[bear.getting.old]

1 hour ago, thehowler said:

If they can't bring themselves to vote for May's soft Brexit, how on Earth are they going to vote for WTO?

They will vote for a proper brexit with no deal, as there are enough brexiteers in all parties to pass it

[onlooker]

13 minutes ago, Confusion of VIs said:

 It's a commonly held belief but not actual true.

A trained negotiator will try to shape the negotiation by being first to state his demands, couched as an offer. Olly Robbins is regarded as a very good and hard negotiator.

The problem is this was never a negotiation, it was a process to be gone through and has produced exactly the intended result.     

I give you Exhibit A showing why May's Govt and civil service have been so lousy in this negotiation. Not that I was expecting anything else from them.

[Confusion of VIs]

59 minutes ago, thehowler said:

Forget the ERG, they are a distraction from the real meat, which is the great bulk of MPs are reluctant to leave.

MPs WILL NOT pass a hard Brexit, they have voted to enforce this through amendments in the House.

So what do you offer leavers in a referendum?

Holding a GE seems even more fanciful than a second referendum. The EU would not halt A50 to allow the UK to continue talking to itself, so we would be holding an election during the run up to crashing out. 

Would either party even be able to put a manifesto together without tearing itself apart. The least you could expect is dozens maybe hundreds of candidates publicly saying they disagree with and will vote against their parties manifesto position on Brexit.    

If there is a second referendum and a hard Brexit is ruled out, then it's Cameron's deal or May's deal. There is nothing else to offer the public.

 

 

 

[Sheeple Splinter]

10 hours ago, Confusion of VIs said:

Nothing to do with Macron or his reforms.

Just look at the reality of EU at the moment, whatever aims they once had there is no possibility of getting the treaty changes necessary to enable any further move to ever closer union.

If some group of core states decide they do want to continue down this path they will have to agree how they can do this with the states that wish to have a looser arrangement.  If they cannot agree this there will be no further move towards ever closer union.

Either way the UK would not be pulled into a closer union than we have today.  

I don't follow, Macron was proposing a multi-speed model?

Quote

Macron lays out vision for 'profound' changes in post-Brexit EU

French president proposes deeper political integration but suggests UK ‘may one day find place’ in EU moving at different speeds...

 

I agree that one of the EU's founding principles has been consigned to the existential crisis bin and that getting consensus amongst the member states is difficult e.g. DST.

No doubt about the UK politicos but In the last 30 months what have the EU achieved as far as reforms are concerned?

If there is a second referendum*, what kind of an EU would the UK be re-joining?

* Now more likely than not IMHO

 

[onlooker]

1 minute ago, Confusion of VIs said:

Holding a GE seems even more fanciful than a second referendum. The EU would not halt A50 to allow the UK to continue talking to itself, so we would be holding an election during the run up to crashing out. 

Would either party even be able to put a manifesto together without tearing itself apart. The least you could expect is dozens maybe hundreds of candidates publicly saying they disagree with and will vote against their parties manifesto position on Brexit.    

If there is a second referendum and a hard Brexit is ruled out, then it's Cameron's deal or May's deal. There is nothing else to offer the public.

 

 

 

I would agree with you except for the small matter of the DUP, who are threatening a no confidence vote, which will precipitate a GE.

[Confusion of VIs]

1 hour ago, rockerboy said:

The UK can no longer practise a foreign policy "siding with the weakest". It was something the UK did for hundreds of years to successfully balance forces across mainland Europe, but now the UK is caught out - it has to deal with a single abstract entity of "Brussels" with the concept of "EU leaders " (which as everyone knows is an abortion of good intentions).

The real power of Europe (headed by Germany/France) has no interest in the UK other than ripping off meaty chunks of the Uk's natural interests (Sea) and Financial industry - Its time to get real here - The UK is not and never has been a strategic member of the club, other than for what the UK has offered in the past as a market for European companies to exploit.

It all looks a bit shit no matter what happens

 

If you look at how the EU has developed over the past 30 years, Euro aside, you could argue that the UK has been the most influential and Strategic member of the club.  

[crouch]

8 minutes ago, bear.getting.old said:

They will vote for a proper brexit with no deal, as there are enough brexiteers in all parties to pass it

No deal does not require a vote; it is the default position.

[bear.getting.old]

If May doesn't change course then the DUP could pull the plug on May. I wouldn't blame them

[bear.getting.old]

1 minute ago, crouch said:

No deal does not require a vote; it is the default position.

Ah good point!

[Sheeple Splinter]

4 hours ago, Dorkins said:

It's a bit chilly in France today, does that mean being in the EU causes cold weather?

That's a bit silly!

Are you an EU existential crisis denier?

[IMHAL]

7 minutes ago, Confusion of VIs said:

Holding a GE seems even more fanciful than a second referendum. The EU would not halt A50 to allow the UK to continue talking to itself, so we would be holding an election during the run up to crashing out. 

Would either party even be able to put a manifesto together without tearing itself apart. The least you could expect is dozens maybe hundreds of candidates publicly saying they disagree with and will vote against their parties manifesto position on Brexit.    

If there is a second referendum and a hard Brexit is ruled out, then it's Cameron's deal or May's deal. There is nothing else to offer the public.

 

 

 

We must be getting close to the need for a government of nation unity by now. Party politics needs to be cast aside in the interests of the country. Given the divisions within each party I'm not sure if even that will help.

 

[Confusion of VIs]

19 minutes ago, Bruce Banner said:

By whom?

Four Prime Ministers for a start.  

[crouch]

10 minutes ago, bear.getting.old said:

If May doesn't change course then the DUP could pull the plug on May. I wouldn't blame them

The DUP should pull the plug on May. 

What happens next? Maybe a vote of confidence leading to a GE. If Labour gets in the fun will really start because they have no coherent policy on Brexit at all and are just as split as the Tories. Corbyn wants out as the rules on state aid and the Growth and Stability Pact would cramp his style mightily. 

 

Edited December 14, 2018 by crouch

[crouch]

3 minutes ago, IMHAL said:

We must be getting close to the need for a government of nation unity by now. Party politics needs to be cast aside in the interests of the country. Given the divisions within each party I'm not sure if even that will help.

 

You may not have noticed but there is no national unity.