Main Menu

Brexit

Started by vandermolen, May 01, 2017, 10:14:35 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Mr. Minnow

Apparently the Telegraph is reporting that May's aides have told arch-Brexiteers like Gove and Johnson that her concession on commitment to regulatory alignment with the customs union and single market is effectively meaningless as it means nothing in EU law. I'd normally take anything the Telegraph says with a truckload of salt, but if this is true it would certainly explain the otherwise puzzling phenomenon of Gove, Johnson and even Fox lauding May for reaching an agreement that up to now they would have denounced as a surrender.

If it really is true, it seems that the plan is to give the EU a commitment that the UK government has no intention of honouring. Even for the Brexiteers, this would be a staggeringly stupid thing to do. Their vision of other countries queuing up to give us incredible new trade deals at mates rates is a fantasy with no factual basis in reality, but even if it were true, other countries would only sign deals with us if they thought the UK could be trusted. Who would touch us with a barge pole if we've just treated the EU in such a blatantly duplicitous fashion? It's not as if we can say that even this government wouldn't be so monumentally stupid as to try something like this, as all the evidence thus far suggests that they would. This is the government whose cabinet still hasn't got round to discussing what sort of final outcome they want from Brexit - 18 months after the referendum and eight months after triggering article 50.

Hopefully the very fact that it's appeared in the Telegraph will scupper this mad idea. It won't go unnoticed in Brussels, so the EU will now suspect that this is what the UK government may be up to - even if the government denies it - and will have it in mind when it comes to the trade talks. To say this does not bode well would be an understatement of immense proportions.   

André

The drama ! This is getting much more fun and exciting than Trump's baby tantrums and the shenanigans of the US congress and senate !  :D

Spineur

Quote from: Mr. Minnow on December 10, 2017, 04:30:31 AM
... it seems that the plan is to give the EU a commitment that the UK government has no intention of honouring.

Perfide Albion ??  Funny I think I have heard that nickname before...

nodogen

#343
Rather like Trump, almost every hour you think What The Absolute Fuck?


May's EU deal not binding, says David Davis


http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-42298971

Mr. Minnow

#344
Quote from: nodogen on December 10, 2017, 06:45:12 AM
Rather like Trump, almost every hour you think What The Absolute Fuck?


May's EU deal not binding, says David Davis


http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-42298971

Brexit is starting to resemble a piece of surrealist performance art.

Interesting sentence in that article:

QuoteBut there is still controversy, and confusion, over what "full alignment" would mean in practice, with some Brexiteers fearing the UK would have to continue to abide by EU regulations on agriculture and other issues after Brexit and would not be able to strike its own trade deals.

That strongly suggests that the clash between different trade deals' regulations I mentioned earlier could indeed be a big problem.

According to this article:

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/dec/10/no-deal-brexit-odds-dropped-dramatically-david-davis

QuoteDavis said, however, that full alignment would only affect a few sectors, such as agriculture, road and rail, and would mean the UK achieving certain outcomes but not necessarily in the same way as the EU did.

So if, as this implies, there are sectors in which full alignment won't apply, and that therefore in those sectors there will be a significant degree of regulatory divergence, that surely takes us back to a hard border, since the EU will want to be sure that UK goods in non-aligned sectors entering the EU are compatible with single market and customs union regulations. I suppose there could be mutual recognition of each others' standards, but the EU won't do that unless our regulations in non-aligned sectors are very similar - or, to put it another way, in regulatory alignment - to theirs. The kindest interpretation of the government's plans I can think of is that they appear to be written on the back of a fag packet. I can think of some distinctly less charitable descriptions as well.

Que

#345
I guess the UK govt doesn't want a deal after all...

Row erupts over claims that Brexit border concessions were 'meaningless' and 'not binding'

The other members of the European Council will not be amused... ::)

As mentioned here before: no credibility = no deal.

Q

Mr. Minnow

#346
Quote from: Que on December 10, 2017, 09:14:04 AM
I guess the UK govt doesn't want a deal after all...

Row erupts over claims that Brexit border concessions were 'meaningless' and 'not binding'

The other members of the European Council will not be amused... ::)

As mentioned here before: no credibility = no deal.

Q

I like this bit:

QuoteLast night, a Downing Street spokesman said: "We do not recognise this account of conversations."

If the reports were false you can be sure the government would be pouring bucketloads of scorn all over them. Instead they issue a feeble denial whose wording could hardly be any weaker, which does rather suggest that the reports are true but they can't admit it. It's the Baldrick approach - government by cunning plan. Unfortunately, this particular plan is making Baldrick look like a strategic genius by comparison.

Que

#347
And Ireland is not happy...

Ireland issues warning to David Davis over Brexit agreement

The Irish government has warned the Brexit Secretary that the border agreement is not a 'statement of intent' it is 'politically bullet-proof'


In my view, what Davis and other Brexiteers don't get, is that this independent from the outcome of the negotiations on a transitional phase and a subsequent trade deal. The adagium "nothing is agreed untill everything is agreed" doesn't quite apply - perhaps in working out details, but not in principle.
The divorce bill is connected to preexisting financial obligations from the UK's current EU membership. The Northern Ireland issue deals with the UK's existing legal obligations under the Good Friday Agreement. The agreement explicitly deals with the situation of a hard Brexit.... The "grandfathering" (preservation of preexisting legal rights) of EU citizens rights is and independent legal matter as well.

Brexiteers assume they can walk away from the divorce agreement if they don't get the trade deal they want.

Not....that would be a breach of an international legal agreement and would have serious consequences.
As the Chancellor already tried to explain to an incredulous audience - the divorce settlement has to be paid irrespective of the outcome subsequent negations.
The same goes for the UK commitments on the way it will abide by the Good Friday Agreement after a Brexit, whatever shape or form it may take.

Davis is now backtracking on Hammonds' statement: Brexit: David Davis says £39bn bill "conditional" on final deal countering Philip Hammond's claim

Very stupid, and very dangerous...

Q

Spineur

EU statement

The updated Negotiating Guidelines the EU adopt next Fri are clear enough: "negotiations in the second phase can only progress as long as all commitments undertaken during the first phase are respected in full and translated faithfully in legal terms as quickly as possible."

The amazing thing is that Daniel Davis is the chief negotiator for the UK.


nodogen

Quote from: Spineur on December 11, 2017, 12:51:59 AM

The amazing thing is that Daniel Davis is the chief negotiator for the UK.

Good news!

He has been replaced by David Davis. 😉

Spineur

#350
Michael Gove unveils Brexit for animals plan (no kidding !!)

https://www.yahoo.com/news/britain-unveils-brexit-animals-plan-005610680.html

British will never cease to surprise me !!  No more bullfights in the UK !

North Star

Quote from: Spineur on December 12, 2017, 08:52:09 AM
Michael Gove unveils Brexit for animals plan (no kidding !!)

https://www.yahoo.com/news/britain-unveils-brexit-animals-plan-005610680.html

British will never cease to surprise me !!

QuoteAs it rejects EU exemptions for activities such as bullfighting and foie gras production, the law would offer "even stronger protection" than the EU protocol "could ever do", said spokesman David Bowles.
Huzzah for Brexit - no more bullfighting or overfed foie gras geese in the UK!
"Everything has beauty, but not everyone sees it." - Confucius

My photographs on Flickr

nodogen

There's obviously nothing Brexitty about animal welfare, but I am all in favour of the highest possible standards, whoever makes the laws. I just find it bizarre this is coming from the party of fox hunting (May had thought another vote on it was a super idea before the GE scuppered that idea). The tory party happily drives human animals into poverty and deprivation, but wants better welfare the the rest. WTF?


Turbot nouveaux

The worst thing about this sorry mess is that although a poll today shows that 51% of UK voters think that Brexit negotiations are going badly, the Tories still have 42% support and lead the Labour party (40%) in the polls by 2%.

What will it take?

Mr. Minnow

Quote from: Turbot nouveaux on December 12, 2017, 02:38:33 PM
The worst thing about this sorry mess is that although a poll today shows that 51% of UK voters think that Brexit negotiations are going badly, the Tories still have 42% support and lead the Labour party (40%) in the polls by 2%.

What will it take?

Polls I've seen recently have either had Labour slightly ahead or the two parties on level pegging, though I believe there was one recently that had a Labour lead of 8 points. But the overall picture seems to be that little has changed since the election.

I think the reason for this is the referendum. It not only revealed a country split down the middle on the issue of the EU, it amplified that split to such an extent that the public has largely gravitated towards which of the two main parties it feels better represents them on that issue. The Tories' pitch to the public is that they're a party of enthusiastic hard Brexiteers, so most Leave voters are sticking with them. Labour's pitch has been that of a party of soft Brexit that wants to stay as close to the EU as possible. Remainers might not find that ideal, but it's far better than hard Brexit so they've mostly gone with Labour.

Obviously this is very broadly speaking. There are other issues which may well start to hurt the Tories - the state of the NHS, the fiasco of Universal Credit, the squeeze on living standards to name just a few. But Brexit currently dominates the agenda and will do until (if?) we leave. The effects of Brexit starting to kick in therefore remains the thing most likely to really cause the Tories trouble. They're hoping that positioning themselves as the most pro-Brexit party will win them votes, but if Brexit goes badly - and given what's happened so far that looks a very distinct possibility - then they'll be associated with it. They probably know that, and are hoping that the worst of the damage can be put off until just after the next election.   

Que

#355
Quote from: Mr. Minnow on December 12, 2017, 03:24:07 PM
Labour's pitch has been that of a party of soft Brexit that wants to stay as close to the EU as possible. Remainers might not find that ideal, but it's far better than hard Brexit so they've mostly gone with Labour.

In my impression Labour is as split on Brexit as the Tories are, though hard Brexiteers are lower in number.
Labour has declined to firmly commit to remain in the customs union and internal market.... "something very close", which is basically May's approach...

Both major parties keep fudging and swaggering because of the split in public opinion.

Q

PS  Labour will have to make a choice on Brexit, and soon

Mr. Minnow

Quote from: Que on December 12, 2017, 10:25:37 PM
In my impression Labour is as split on Brexit as the Tories are, though hard Brexiteers are lower in number.
Labour has declined to firmly commit to remain in the customs union and internal market.... "something very close", which is basically May's approach...

Both major parties keep fudging and swaggering because of the split in public opinion.

Q

PS  Labour will have to make a choice on Brexit, and soon

Labour has its splits on Brexit, but they are certainly not as drastic as those in the Tory party. The vast majority of Labour MPs and members are solidly pro-Remain. The split is among Labour voters, which I mentioned recently. Even so, I believe around two thirds of Labour voters voted Remain, though it's certainly true that there are a number of Labour seats in the north of England and the Midlands that voted for Brexit.

As I said before, I think Corbyn would probably like to make an explicit offer to the public of staying in the customs union and single market, but he can't do it until some of those Leave voters start to switch in sufficient numbers to make such an offer politically viable. That's not likely to happen until those voters start to realise they've been had. It may start to happen during the trade negotiations. They will be far harder than phase 1 - which proved hard enough - and they won't be able to fudge it, as decisions will have to be made on which way to jump on those issues which have been fudged for now. That's when Leave voters may start to see that Brexit is not going to deliver what they were told it would. Labour will obviously need a concrete policy of its own ready and waiting to go by that point. 



nodogen

#359