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.

JBS

Thanks. Now it merely remains to ask if Sir Jacob of Reesmogg's claim was correct. (I go on the assumption thar Sir Jacob of Reesmogg achieves Trumpian levels of veracity.)

Hollywood Beach Broadwalk

Mr. Minnow

Quote from: JBS on December 14, 2018, 12:02:33 PM
Thanks. Now it merely remains to ask if Sir Jacob of Reesmogg's claim was correct. (I go on the assumption thar Sir Jacob of Reesmogg achieves Trumpian levels of veracity.)

His claim may be correct if he was excluding all those MPs who have any sort of role in government right down to the most junior and insignificant levels. He kept referring to MPs "on the government payroll" so I assume this is what he meant.

He's certainly right in saying that this was a blow to May's authority (what was left of it), but it's also clearly true that the ERG screwed it up, as there now can't be a Tory leadership election for at least a year (unless she goes of her own accord of course). There was a certain degree of irony in watching the man who criticises remainers for not accepting the referendum result call for May to resign even though his side had just lost.

JBS

Quote from: Mr. Minnow on December 14, 2018, 03:54:26 PM
His claim may be correct if he was excluding all those MPs who have any sort of role in government right down to the most junior and insignificant levels. He kept referring to MPs "on the government payroll" so I assume this is what he meant.

He's certainly right in saying that this was a blow to May's authority (what was left of it), but it's also clearly true that the ERG screwed it up, as there now can't be a Tory leadership election for at least a year (unless she goes of her own accord of course). There was a certain degree of irony in watching the man who criticises remainers for not accepting the referendum result call for May to resign even though his side had just lost.

In fact, in the clip I heard, Sir Jacob of ReesMogg seems to assert that May actually lost the no confidence vote even though she won it.

No wonder Trump loves him.

Hollywood Beach Broadwalk

steve ridgway

Since we entered the Post Truth era the BBC News has been including a Reality Check section in which they explain the actual facts  :-\.

André

Coming out next month, a TV series about the Brexit referendum, with Benedict Cumbersome. I wonder if there is a real audience for that. I mean, apart from rubbing salt into old and current wounds...,

Spoiler alert: Benedict's hairline has receded a lot.

Mr. Minnow

Quote from: JBS on December 14, 2018, 04:11:06 PM
In fact, in the clip I heard, Sir Jacob of ReesMogg seems to assert that May actually lost the no confidence vote even though she won it.

In that case it's as I thought: he's saying that the votes of MPs on the government payroll don't really count, as they'd be expected to vote for the PM. It's hardly convincing, not least because it's a secret ballot, so even cabinet ministers can profess undying loyalty in public and then vote differently in the polling booth. It seems to be almost a tradition for Tory MPs to do that in a leadership vote, and the fact that it makes them look like a bunch of duplicitous shits doesn't appear to bother them in the slightest.

QuoteNo wonder Trump loves him.

For all the cosmetic differences, Rees-Mogg is quite similar to Trump, as is Johnson for that matter. All three of them have adopted the persona of the "man of the people" leading a grass roots anti-establishment insurgency against the hated out of touch elite - despite the fact that all three of them were born into a life of wealth and privilege, are in no danger of ever experiencing anything else, and are therefore very much a part of the establishment they claim to despise.

vandermolen

I gather that David 'I'm not a quitter' Cameron is now advising Theresa May, so we are saved after all!
::)
"Courage is going from failure to failure without losing enthusiasm" (Churchill).

'The test of a work of art is, in the end, our affection for it, not our ability to explain why it is good' (Stanley Kubrick).

steve ridgway

I think the last PM whose promise actually came true was Gordon Brown with "an end to boom and bust" - we have certainly not had another boom since ::).

steve ridgway

When's Theresa May going to release an album anyway?

vandermolen

Quote from: 2dogs on December 17, 2018, 07:54:18 AM
When's Theresa May going to release an album anyway?
What a ghastly CD!
"Courage is going from failure to failure without losing enthusiasm" (Churchill).

'The test of a work of art is, in the end, our affection for it, not our ability to explain why it is good' (Stanley Kubrick).

Ghost of Baron Scarpia

I just saw on the BBC web site that the Conservative Government is now considering the dumpster fire plan (No Deal Brexit).

???

Que

#811
It's a mind boggling spectacle....  ???  The political implosion in slow motion of a dying empire...

I still think May's deal will come through in the end....

Just because it is the only option that is remotely acceptable to a majority in parliament.

A political deadlock however, could either lead to an accidental no deal situation... or to a last minute retraction of the exit notification. But who would risk to defy the referendum result?  ::)

I feel that whatever happens the political crisis will continue.

Q

Mr. Minnow

Quote from: Que on December 18, 2018, 01:22:42 AM
It's a mind boggling spectacle....  ???  The political implosion in slow motion of a dying empire...

I still think May's deal will come through in the end....

Just because it is the only option that is remotely acceptable to a majority in parliament.

I think she needs a miracle to get her deal through. 117 of her own MPs were willing to vote against her in a no confidence vote. If they were willing to do that it's hard to see many of them voting for her deal. It also looks highly unlikely that the DUP will vote for it either. The only way it passes is if Labour bails her out by voting for it and there appears to be very little if any chance of that. There was real anger from Labour MPs yesterday - including from those who are no friends of Corbyn - who accused May of deliberately running the clock down to bounce MPs into backing her deal.

QuoteA political deadlock however, could either lead to an accidental no deal situation... or to a last minute retraction of the exit notification.

Asking for an extension of article 50 is looking more likely by the day. The consequences of a no deal situation would be so severe that any government would face an uphill struggle to survive, to put it mildly. Trying to blame it all on the EU might work for a bit, but sooner or later (probably sooner) public anger would be directed at those in power. Polls consistently show that most of the public think the government has handled the negotiations badly, and even if May's "resilience" is admired by some that's not likely to count for much once the consequences of no deal really start to bite. No one wants to be in power when that happens.

QuoteBut who would risk to defy the referendum result?  ::)

It shouldn't be seen as defying the referendum result, though I'm sure that's how it will be spun. May's deal is light years away form the cake and unicorns Brexit promised two years ago and the Brexiters have never bothered to produce a properly thought through plan of their own.

QuoteI feel that whatever happens the political crisis will continue.

Q

No douibt about that. There are many possible ways this could play out, but all of them leave a substantial portion of the public feeling angry.

Que

#813
Quote from: Mr. Minnow on December 18, 2018, 02:31:57 AM
I think she needs a miracle to get her deal through. 117 of her own MPs were willing to vote against her in a no confidence vote. If they were willing to do that it's hard to see many of them voting for her deal. It also looks highly unlikely that the DUP will vote for it either. The only way it passes is if Labour bails her out by voting for it and there appears to be very little if any chance of that. There was real anger from Labour MPs yesterday - including from those who are no friends of Corbyn - who accused May of deliberately running the clock down to bounce MPs into backing her deal.

Yes, MP's are angry about the way May tries to force their hand in accepting a deal that nobody likes (for wildly diverse reasons), but none of them is able to come up with a viable alternative solution. And that notably includes Corbyn cs....
One suggestion is to hold a succession of votes in parliament on all the possible options (Norway (plus), Canada, no deal, etc.) Even if that would render a result, that would mean a lot of renegotiation. My estimate is that the EU will stick to its plan of an exit deal now, and move the negotiations of a future relationship forward. It would basically mean a blind Brexit with a NI backstop.
The only clean way out of this mess is a referendum with a clear majority in favour of remaining in the EU, but what is the likelihood of that?

QuoteAsking for an extension of article 50 is looking more likely by the day. The consequences of a no deal situation would be so severe that any government would face an uphill struggle to survive, to put it mildly. Trying to blame it all on the EU might work for a bit, but sooner or later (probably sooner) public anger would be directed at those in power. Polls consistently show that most of the public think the government has handled the negotiations badly, and even if May's "resilience" is admired by some that's not likely to count for much once the consequences of no deal really start to bite. No one wants to be in power when that happens.

Apart from a new referendum, the EU might agree to an extension if no other options are left except, for a no deal, hard Brexit. This will only become clear at the last hour. I don't think it would be willing to facilitate any political procrastination.....

QuoteIt shouldn't be seen as defying the referendum result, though I'm sure that's how it will be spun. May's deal is light years away form the cake and unicorns Brexit promised two years ago and the Brexiters have never bothered to produce a properly thought through plan of their own.

True!  :) But indeed this how it will be perceived and it would amount to political suicide by consequence. But perhaps there is an old grandee that could lead a coalition of the willing from the backbenches?

QuoteNo doubt about that. There are many possible ways this could play out, but all of them leave a substantial portion of the public feeling angry.

This is what has suprised me the most. Two years of greater clarity on the choice whether to leave the EU or not, hasn't led to any evolving opinions - the trenches have only been dug deeper and deeper.

Q

André

Which is better, a political deadlock or the current political dreadlocks ?


Mr. Minnow

#815
Quote from: Que on December 18, 2018, 03:52:25 AM
Yes, MP's are angry about the way May tries to force their hand in accepting a deal that nobody likes (for wildly diverse reasons), but none of them is able to come up with a viable alternative solution. And that notably includes Corbyn cs....
One suggestion is to hold a succession of votes in parliament on all the possible options (Norway (plus), Canada, no deal, etc.) Even if that would render a result, that would mean a lot of renegotiation. My estimate is that the EU will stick to its plan of an exit deal now, and move the negotiations of a future relationship forward. It would basically mean a blind Brexit with a NI backstop.
The only clean way out of this mess is a referendum with a clear majority in favour of remaining in the EU, but what is the likelihood of that?

There doesn't seem to be a majority in the Commons for any type of Brexit, nor does there appear to be any prospect of one. There might be a majority for a referendum, especially when May's deal is voted down. Faced with a choice of no deal or a referendum, most MPs will go for the latter. They might be worried about "going against" the 2016 result, but any flak they get from that will be as nothing compared to the public reaction to the consequences of no deal. As you say, the EU has indicated that a referendum is one of the things for which they would be willing to extend Article 50. (Of course, we could just revoke Article 50, since we know from the ECJ ruling that we can do that unilaterally, but I doubt it would happen, and if it did, it would have to be accompanied by a promise of a public vote of some kind.) 

QuoteTrue!  :) But indeed this how it will be perceived and it would amount to political suicide by consequence. But perhaps there is an old grandee that could lead a coalition of the willing from the backbenches?

Taking us over the cliff with a no deal Brexit would be politically suicidal as well though, certainly when the effects started to kick in, which probably wouldn't take long. There really isn't a good option available. Not sure about an old grandee leading a coalition of the willing, though once May's deal has been rejected, what's left of her authority will be completely shot and the various factions in the Commons (some of which cross party lines) will try to take back control, to coin a phrase.

QuoteThis is what has suprised me the most. Two years of greater clarity on the choice whether to leave the EU or not, hasn't led to any evolving opinions - the trenches have only been dug deeper and deeper.

You have to remember the daily diet of bullshit the public has been fed by much of the media. For example: I caught a bit of Sky's review of today's papers last night. One of the articles was a double page spread in the Sun headlined " No deal - no problem!". It was written by Shanker Singham, a prominent Leave supporter who claims to be an expert in international trade but spouts such utter nonsense that he must have graduated from Trump University. Apparently the EU has more to lose than us if we prepare properly for no deal. Yes, really. I've also seen comments from people who think that no deal means we carry on with the status quo. I know it's absurd, but it would seem that there are a lot of people who really do believe this crap.



Que

The anology with the Titanic doesn't stop with the iceberg - the life boats are only available to the passengers that are travelling 1st Class:

Credit Suisse is telling its wealthiest clients to hurry and move their money out of the UK before Brexit

Q

The new erato

https://news.liverpool.ac.uk/2018/12/13/full-speech-sir-ivan-rogers-on-brexit/

When Britain's ambassador to the EU quit in 2017, he urged staff to fight "ill-founded arguments and muddled thinking" in government. This week, seeing that there is still quite a bit of this about, Ivan Rogers delivered a speech in Liverpool on "the nine lessons of Brexit", which has rather neatly summarised the flaws, dishonesty and confusion that have characterised Britain's approach to the negotiations. The speech will make uncomfortable reading for both Theresa May, her cabinet and her political opponents, and can be read in full here. At more than 10,000 words, however, it's longer than your average policy brief. For them, and for you, here are Rogers' key points, in digested form.

'Brexit means Brexit'

Rogers points out that the government seems to be expecting the EU to bend its club rules to accommodate the UK. The EU is not going to do this, because its solidarity is with its partners, not with a soon-to-be opponent and rival. When Britain leaves, it really will be leaving, and won't be offered frictionless trade without free movement and the continued jurisdiction of the European court of justice. Neither will it be offered the benefits of membership in return for alignment with EU rules from the outside. He says: "The solidarity of the club members will always be with each other, not with you. We have seen that over the backstop issue over the last 18 months. The 26 supported Dublin, not London. They still do. Nothing the prime minister now bids for will change that."

'Other people have sovereignty too'

The EU will try to maximise its own sovereignty and power where it can, and this will not work to the advantage of the UK. Rogers points out that although not technically bound to follow EU rules after Brexit, even in the event of a hard separation, in reality they will still affect us: "Because in 'taking back control' over our laws and leaving the adjudication and enforcement machinery of what used to be our 'home' market, we are privileging notional autonomy over law – making over real power to set the rules by which in practice we shall be governed, since departure from norms set by others when we are not in the room will in practice greatly constrain our room for manoeuvre."

'Brexit is a process not an event'

The UK underestimated the EU's ability to negotiate, and bought into the fantasy of a quick, easy break. This caused it to make several serious mistakes: triggering article 50 too soon, and giving little serious thought to the adjustment period that would be needed because it assumed a trade deal would be so easy. As Rogers says: "What we needed to do very early on was to recognise the complexity and inevitable longevity of the exit process, work out our viable options, achieve real clarity about where we wanted to land, having worked honestly through the very tough choices we faced – and still do face – and reconcile ourselves to a serious period of transition."

'It is not possible or democratic to argue that only one Brexit destination is true, legitimate and represents the revealed 'will of the people' and that all other potential destinations outside the EU are 'Brexit in name only'.'

Theresa May's model for leaving prioritises ending free movement above other objectives, and frictionless trade in goods above the interest of the UK services sector. But there are many other possible interpretations of the vote.

Rogers says: "Both fervent leavers and fervent remainers as well as No 10 seem to me now to seek to delegitimise a priori every version of the world they don't support."

'If WTO terms or existing EU preferential deals are not good enough for the UK in major third country markets, they can't be good enough for trade with our largest market.'

There is a contradiction at the heart of the argument made by many of those advocating no deal. They say both that WTO terms are good enough for the UK to trade on, and that Britain's prosperity depends on it striking multiple trade deals abroad.

Rogers puts it like this: "You cannot simultaneously argue that it is perfectly fine to leave a deep free trade agreement with easily our largest export and import market for the next generation, and trade on WTO terms because that is how we and others trade with everyone else – and argue that it is imperative we get out of the EU in order that we can strike preferential trade deals with large parts of the rest of the world, because the existing terms on which we trade with the rest of the world are intolerable."

'The huge problem for the UK with either reversion to WTO terms or with a standard free trade deal with the EU is in services'

The UK services industry will suffer greatly under current plans for leaving the EU, because May has emphasised frictionless trade in goods, despite manufacturing representing a far smaller slice of the economy. This is a disaster that not many people are yet talking about, but which will damage the very communities that were promised a Brexit dividend. Rogers says: "Post exit, and post the end of any transitional arrangement, it is UK services exporters who will face the starkest worsening of trade terms because of the substantial difference between how far services trade is liberalised under even the highly imperfect European services single market, and the very best that is achievable under any other form of free trade or regional agreement on the planet."

'Beware all supposed deals bearing 'pluses'. The 'pluses' merely signify that all deficiencies in the named deal will miraculously disappear when we Brits come to negotiate our own version of it.'

Adding "plus" to any deal is merely the expression of a wish, an indication that whatever deal being referred to – Canada, or Norway – has disadvantages that you would ideally like to eliminate. The most mendacious of these coinages is perhaps "no-deal plus" – the idea that walking away will prompt offers of mini side deals on medicines and transport from the EU. Instead, Rogers says: "No developed country has left a trade bloc before, let alone in disorderly fashion, and let alone one which has become a lot more than a trade bloc. But I do fully understand the legal realities. And because so-called 'WTO rules' deliver precisely no continuity in multiple key sectors of the economy, we could expect disruption on a scale and of a length that no one has experienced in the developed world in the last couple of generations."

'You cannot, and should not want to, conduct such a huge negotiation as untransparently as the UK has. And in the end, it does you no good to try.'

The EU has been much better than the UK at transparency during these negotiations. The UK must do better: "You can't possibly run one of the largest and most complex trade negotiations on the planet, and leave most supposed insiders, let alone a much wider public, in the dark about the extremely difficult choices we shall face."

'Real honesty with the public is the best – the only – policy if we are to get to the other side of Brexit with a healthy democracy, a reasonably unified country and a healthy economy.'

The UK government has been opaque to the point of dishonesty, which has allowed all sides to get into the habit of magical thinking and fantastical feats of optimism.

"And even yesterday morning I listened to a shadow cabinet member promising, with a straight face, that, even after a general election, there would be time for Labour to negotiate a completely different deal – including a full trade deal, which would replicate all the advantages of the single market and customs union. And all before 30 March. I assume they haven't yet stopped laughing in Brussels."

What is particularly striking about Rogers' speech is that it hasn't been made before. The flimsy arguments Rogers does away with here have been deployed by our most senior politicians for some two years now. Perhaps as a result, when Rogers's speech was published it was greeted not so much with interest as with a sort of relief – testament to how unmoored from reality the discussions have become. It should serve as a useful blueprint of how the debate should be conducted from now on. But given the problems with our political class Rogers has diagnosed, that in itself would be a miracle.

Que

Well, Corbyn has not changed his tune....  ::)

He still wants to leave EU, and no referendum....

And still focused on a customs union (which is included in the negotiated deal BTW),  instead of the much more  economically significant internal market. You know, because of those terrible state aid rules and all that... 

Corbyn: Brexit would go ahead even if Labour won snap election


Meanwhile, according to a recent poll: Among Labour voters, there is now 72% support for staying in the EU and just 66% of Labour voters who backed Brexit in 2016 would vote Leave in a new referendum.

YouGov Poll Reveals 64% Want Second Brexit Referendum

Q

Que

Might Brexiteers, when faced with the clear possibility of new referendum with a popular majority in favour of remaining in the EU, back May's Brexit deal in the end?  ::)

And the same might go for Corbyn, after he discovered he is not going to get that general election?
Mind that he hasn't ruled out supporting the negotiated deal, provided there would be some assurances - whatever those might be. He will counting on winning the next elections anyway... in this way May will have done his dirty work for him..

Q