Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum

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


Recommended Posts

8 hours ago, smash said:

Absolutely, the hardcore Brexit crowd hate May's deal and only want a No Deal. I wonder what percentage of people who voted leave + newly enabled voters actually back May? Could be as low as 20%.

I wonder what percentage of people actually back No Deal... could be as low as 10%. Unless the the people are fed-up to the back teeth of the whole thing and would accept anything other than another 2 years of trying to find out what the Meaning of Brexit is (or more accurately, what politician's thought people voted for). 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 135.8k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • GrizzlyDave

    9502

  • Confusion of VIs

    7417

  • jonb2

    5732

  • thehowler

    5055

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

I do.   https://twitter.com/housepricemania

1409 pages....you guys should have your own forum !!!

Oh OK. Shame that really, but hey it looks like @IMHAL helped us both out. Nice repost though, thanks ! Any thoughts ?  

Posted Images

33 minutes ago, yelims said:

Of course we will for goods, I never seen this country so United due to Brexit, we will protect our farmers from chlorinated chicken and gm food, you on other hand will kill your agriculture.

And if you won't put a border in Ireland then we have no reason to sign any trade deal as Ireland can be used by the world to dump onto UK market.

GD's pretty much lost the plot and gone full on native.

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Dave Beans said:

Maybe I'm being thick, but how does the logic on that, work?  The Irish border, the 39bn & citizens rights will be the first thing that the EU will slap on the table, and the WTO is not an end point.

When we come to negotiate the long term relationship things could be a lot different - and I'm aware we're only talking maybe six months to a year.

There will be a new, much more populist EP; recession may be beginning to bite and the Irish border issue will have disappeared because practical means will have been found to get around the issue. In particular the £95 bn goods surplus may be fast disappearing due to WTO tariff levels on things like cars and the re orientation of agricultural imports.

There is a lot of pressure from within the EU critical of Brussels on this issue and we may find that the EU is much more accommodative than previously. 

Also we are, and will remain, an important pillar of the security and defence architecture of Europe.

There is renewed talk about a "European Partnership" containing some elements of the "variable geometry" scheme that was around 20-30 years ago which could provide a fertile background for talks and a way of being a member of a wider European grouping without being a member of the EU.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, Dave Beans said:

Both the UK and the EU will need to, if they are going to honour their WTO commitments; to protect the EU's regional trade area (the SM), and for the UK to honour the MFN principle.  The EU will be first, but after a year or so  (if the UK applies for emergency waivers), the UK will also need to follow.

Trade continuity agreement?

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Dave Beans said:

Whatever the outcome, the UK's relationship with the EU will never be stationary.  For as long the exists, our relationship will constantly evolve..As customs declarations are going online (as Switzerland has), then if goes this way, the Sweden / Norway infrastructure can be removed. 

If there is a conflict between EU and EFTA states, then the EFTA Court and ECJ meet to sort out a solution...

As for the reasonings behind the ERG, I could write at length, or I could let @jonb2 do the explaining..

 

 

So if I get this right, being subject to the EFTA court may be easier than the ECJ, because one of the most contentious issues is the way the ECJ has proactively moved beyond resolving trade disputes, into ruling in many other areas of social policy to enforce conformity and adherence to Brussels directives. The question remains - how independent is the EFTA court? The quote "The relevant figures make it clear that the EFTA Court has a disproportionate influence on the ECJ." comes directly from this source (https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/brexit/2018/10/29/britzerland-the-problem-of-dispute-resolution-post-brexit)

but there is no evidence given in the paper. I am not a lawyer but there seems to be a fundamental difference in that the ECJ is given primacy, therefore can make its own law, whereas the EFTA court must persuade. This is explained in: (https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/brexit/2017/08/25/how-the-efta-court-works-and-why-it-is-an-option-for-post-brexit-britain/)

Though the writer ( Carl Baudenbacherthe President of the Court of the European Free Trade Association (EFTA) ) of that article is clearly banging his own drum, playing up the influence of the EFTA court, yet has to admit: " When it comes to the law on the books, the EFTA Court is supposed to follow relevant ECJ case law, whereas the ECJ is free to follow EFTA Court case law. " and even reproduces Matts Person's comment " Mats Persson’s contention that under Articles 105 and 111 EEA, the EFTA Court “was easily ‘outgunned’ by the ECJ,”.

It looks like Carl Baudenbacher is giving the game away by writing - "I am a bit surprised that the British government’s “Enforcement and dispute resolution” paper is limited to the law on the books." In other words the UK relies on the law as passed by legislation, whereas the ECJ can make it up as it goes along. Would that be a correct interpretation of ECJ behaviour? Once the ECJ has made it up, the EFTA court has to follow. Maybe that is why the ERG object?

Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, onlooker said:

So if I get this right, being subject to the EFTA court may be easier than the ECJ, because one of the most contentious issues is the way the ECJ has proactively moved beyond resolving trade disputes, into ruling in many other areas of social policy to enforce conformity and adherence to Brussels directives. The question remains - how independent is the EFTA court? The quote "The relevant figures make it clear that the EFTA Court has a disproportionate influence on the ECJ." comes directly from this source (https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/brexit/2018/10/29/britzerland-the-problem-of-dispute-resolution-post-brexit)

but there is no evidence given in the paper. I am not a lawyer but there seems to be a fundamental difference in that the ECJ is given primacy, therefore can make its own law, whereas the EFTA court must persuade. This is explained in: (https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/brexit/2017/08/25/how-the-efta-court-works-and-why-it-is-an-option-for-post-brexit-britain/)

Though the writer ( Carl Baudenbacherthe President of the Court of the European Free Trade Association (EFTA) ) of that article is clearly banging his own drum, playing up the influence of the EFTA court, yet has to admit: " When it comes to the law on the books, the EFTA Court is supposed to follow relevant ECJ case law, whereas the ECJ is free to follow EFTA Court case law. " and even reproduces Matts Person's comment " Mats Persson’s contention that under Articles 105 and 111 EEA, the EFTA Court “was easily ‘outgunned’ by the ECJ,”.

It looks like Carl Baudenbacher is giving the game away by writing - "I am a bit surprised that the British government’s “Enforcement and dispute resolution” paper is limited to the law on the books." In other words the UK relies on the law as passed by legislation, whereas the ECJ can make it up as it goes along. Would that be a correct interpretation of ECJ behaviour? Once the ECJ has made it up, the EFTA court has to follow. Maybe that is why the ERG object?

Here’s an article I posted about the EFTA court a while ago...

https://www.politics.co.uk/blogs/2017/09/15/the-eea-option-saving-britain-from-hard-brexit-part3

The ERG gang are working with the Tufton St mob, whose contacts will make a fortune in an asset firesale under a hard brexit

Edited by Dave Beans
Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Dave Beans said:

Here’s an article I posted about the EFTA court a while ago...

https://www.politics.co.uk/blogs/2017/09/15/the-eea-option-saving-britain-from-hard-brexit-part3

The ERG gang are working with the Tufton St mob, whose contacts will make a fortune in an asset firesale under a hard brexit

A good detailed article covering a few areas including the legal aspects of possible EFTA membership.

Personally I  think people who can’t understand this sort of detail should be barred from voting.

Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, Mikhail Liebenstein said:

A good detailed article covering a few areas including the legal aspects of possible EFTA membership.

Personally I  think people who can’t understand this sort of detail should be barred from voting.

The only bit that narks me a little bit about that article, is the pay no say meme..

Edited by Dave Beans
Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, Dave Beans said:

Here’s an article I posted about the EFTA court a while ago...

https://www.politics.co.uk/blogs/2017/09/15/the-eea-option-saving-britain-from-hard-brexit-part3

The ERG gang are working with the Tufton St mob, whose contacts will make a fortune in an asset firesale under a hard brexit

The article says pretty well exactly what I wrote in my earlier post about the relationship between the EFTA court and the ECJ. The comments at the end are interesting, because commentators write that this is not an economic dispute, but a political one. The EU will not accept the UK joining EFTA because the size, power and influence of the UK economy will set EFTA up as a rival to the EU. Brussels has a benign attitude to EFTA countries at present purely because they are compliant. Brussels views EFTA as the waiting room to join the EU, even though this is not actually happening now. The issue always comes back to whether the UK will accept being subject to rule from Brussels or not - quite a fundamental point of sovereignty.

Do you have any evidence that ERG supporters are only in it for their economic advantage?

Edit to add, I am aware that Norway pays into the EU budget, mainly to offset their huge exports to the EU. DOes Iceland pay as well?

Edited by onlooker
Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, prozac said:

I may be balding but I have better hair than Claudia Winkelman

i am going to turkey for a hair transplant 

Why don't you use a turkey for a hair transplant instead?

It's a very Brexit thing to do. Self-sufficiency, resourcefulness and all that.

In fact, I might start a turkey salon and ask Chris Grayling to invest as he's someone with a vested interest.

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Bruce Banner said:

MPs are furious that May is trying to put the blame on them.

At least they have a voice!

We, the general public, have no way of telling the authoritarian nightmare that she is not on our side and we want a second referendum!

She does not speak for, nor understand, the people!

She’s talking to those who’ve been groomed to believe her ‘analysis’. You must have heard plenty of this nonsense over the last few weeks and more.

Aside from the fact of driving us over the cliff with a bizarre populist sneer, it’s a worrying precedent for British politics.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, crouch said:

When we come to negotiate the long term relationship things could be a lot different - and I'm aware we're only talking maybe six months to a year.

There will be a new, much more populist EP; recession may be beginning to bite and the Irish border issue will have disappeared because practical means will have been found to get around the issue. In particular the £95 bn goods surplus may be fast disappearing due to WTO tariff levels on things like cars and the re orientation of agricultural imports.

There is a lot of pressure from within the EU critical of Brussels on this issue and we may find that the EU is much more accommodative than previously. 

Also we are, and will remain, an important pillar of the security and defence architecture of Europe.

There is renewed talk about a "European Partnership" containing some elements of the "variable geometry" scheme that was around 20-30 years ago which could provide a fertile background for talks and a way of being a member of a wider European grouping without being a member of the EU.

 

Ah so regurgitating "German car industry will intervene"  and "EU will fold at 11th hour" arguments. Have these lies not been shown to be ******** by reality?

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

TM has been clear about not going back on her word, seeing her deal through.... it is clear most do not want her deal, most do not want a no deal.... so would not be at all surprised if A50 is revoked and we start again doing what should have been done in the first place. ?

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, pig said:

She’s talking to those who’ve been groomed to believe her ‘analysis’. You must have heard plenty of this nonsense over the last few weeks and more.

Aside from the fact of driving us over the cliff with a bizarre populist sneer, it’s a worrying precedent for British politics.

 

As I said, yesterday, if she gets away with this the next step is to table a motion to appoint her as "Leader" and override Parliament if they reject it because she knows what the people want.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, onlooker said:

The article says pretty well exactly what I wrote in my earlier post about the relationship between the EFTA court and the ECJ. The comments at the end are interesting, because commentators write that this is not an economic dispute, but a political one. The EU will not accept the UK joining EFTA because the size, power and influence of the UK economy will set EFTA up as a rival to the EU. Brussels has a benign attitude to EFTA countries at present purely because they are compliant. Brussels views EFTA as the waiting room to join the EU, even though this is not actually happening now. The issue always comes back to whether the UK will accept being subject to rule from Brussels or not - quite a fundamental point of sovereignty.

Do you have any evidence that ERG supporters are only in it for their economic advantage?

Yes EFTA states have joined the EU, but the EEA is a completely separate treaty, and the likes of Iceland and Norway have no desire to join.  Norway have rejected it twice.  I think once we are out, it will inevitably lead to a proper two tier Europe at some point.

Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, yelims said:

Ah so regurgitating "German car industry will intervene"  and "EU will fold at 11th hour" arguments. Have these lies not been shown to be ******** by reality?

 

Are you capable of reading? 

"When we come to negotiate the long term relationship..." I am talking about the future relationship not the next week. This is not regurgitating old arguments.

It's good to see you're keeping up your record of incomprehension and outright stupidity.

 

Edited by crouch
Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Confusion of VIs said:

It is not possible with 27 stakeholders all having a veto to operate in that manner. 

The EU did a lot of work to agree a negotiating mandate for Barnier that kept to the core treaties and removed all of the special pleading/redlines that individual states would have loved to  have included in the negotiating mandate. 

As a result, Barnier was given a mandate that included as much flexibility as was possible. Reopening the agreement would cause all of the 27 states to re-evaluate whether they were happy with the mandate and most likely several would add in their previously removed red lines, others would want it tightened up to take account of the fact May/UK is no longer trusted to honor any agreement that is not legally binding.    

And then by being rigid with that they have said "we are unable / unwilling to actually negotiate." With that position getting nowhere is almost inevitable - if that's the way they were handling it there was never any point in wasting time talking to them in the first place.

Quote

The idea that the EU would rewrite its core treaties and various linked international agreements to accommodate May's entirely arbitrary red lines was always totally unrealistic. Even if bizarrely they did decide to do this it would have taken 10 years with no guarantee that the end result would be anything like acceptable to the UK.  

In other words the EU is far too rigid and inflexible to deal with, which is a good part of why we got into this position in the first place. What you're saying is that it is unable to deal with the outside world in a meaningful way.

Quote

The way round the current deadlocks is for the leaving state to accept reality and rejoin the world as it is not as they dishonestly told the people it was.   

That's amusing!

Quote

The EU has said several times that they would extend A50, for either the UK to reconsider whether it wishes to leave or to renegotiate the deal based on the UK relaxing its red lines - essentially to move up the levels in Barnier's graphic.

Or for them to relax theirs. Again, this idea "you have to change until you meet what we've already decided." That isn't going to get anywhere and is supremely arrogant. Haven't you realised yet that this is exactly the sort of behaviour that has made so many people sick of the EU? Once again it is not negotiation. If the EU is either unwilling to unable to negotiate they shouldn't even use the word - can't they at least be honest?

Quote

But again this talk of EU red lines is misleading as they represent the reality of the treaties that govern the EU and all of it's existing trade agreements, not the arbitrary red lines created by May to hold her party together.

They're arbitrary red lines created by the EU to hold its authority together. You're using serious flaws in the structure of the EU (that make it far too rigid and inflexible to meaningfully deal with anyone else beyond a fairly simple level) to try to defend its behaviour. That would work if those rules were imposed from outside, but they're of its own making.

Quote

Perhaps the EU should have added a few arbitrary ones that could have been negotiated away e.g. UK to give Gibraltar back to Spain, or EU states to retain fishing rights in perpetuity.  However, they didn't so it is May who will have to make a unilateral move.  

No, both sides need to be prepared to move. If one isn't the other side may as well be talking to a brick wall. Even if we had someone far more capable than May we'd still be in the same position because the EU won't do more than say "here are the choices we've decided, pick one." There's nothing to discuss with them and not point wasting time doing so.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Riedquat said:

 

In other words the EU is far too rigid and inflexible to deal with, which is a good part of why we got into this position in the first place. What you're saying is that it is unable to deal with the outside world in a meaningful way.

 

EUs lines are written in its constitution, if they were ignored you would be the one screaming dictatorship and so on

May's red lines are her own making and not backed by UK law, anyways UK law can be rewritten at any time by parliament because yee guys have no constitution (and real democracy for that matter)

Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, Bruce Banner said:

As I said, yesterday, if she gets away with this the next step is to table a motion to appoint her as "Leader" and override Parliament if they reject it because she knows what the people want.

Well as expected she is going to get her cliff edge, so it should be plain sailing for her deal next week.

However, she seems to be trying her best to lose the vote by alienating as many MPs as possible.  

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • 433 Brexit, House prices and Summer 2020

    1. 1. Including the effects Brexit, where do you think average UK house prices will be relative to now in June 2020?


      • down 5% +
      • down 2.5%
      • Even
      • up 2.5%
      • up 5%



×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.