Another new Brexit thread

[Ban-jani]

am talking about team remain not you , unless you are in talks with tusk? But there have been many instances of high profile people butting in and doing their country no favours whatsoever .

I am sure Tony Blair would have appreciated forner pms butting in and leaking info to iraq !!!

What remain team?

What info is Tony Blair leaking?

What does he have access to that the EU doesn’t?

I also don’t think comparing leaking info to a despot country we were at war with and the European Union is comparable in the slightest.

 

[blueinsa]

???

What are having for dinner?
"We will not see movement from the EU unless and until they face the prospect of a viable No-Deal option - and the political will to use it."

What's wrong with Otamendi?

"We will not see movement from the EU unless and until they face the prospect of a viable No-Deal option - and the political will to use it."

Stop it free trade zone from the arctic to the Russian front or whatever it is you repeat ad nausea.

 

[lancs blue]

I assume that details are being kept quiet for now so as to give the ERG and Farage as little time as possible to kick off when they get to know the deal - all are strangely silent at the moment. I wonder if the deal will pass the acid test in the commons? Interesting times ahead.

If the effective outcome is going to be a customs border in the Irish Sea - whether explicit or implicit - I can't see the DUP or Farage suddenly having a road to Damascus moment. The ERG I wouldn't have a clue about, a lot of them voted for and against May's deal at different times.

 

[mcfc1632]

I don't think it will happen BI but the border between Scotland and England would not have the GFA to contend with. It would not be exactly the same situation.
It would basically be a border between the EU and UK without the NI issues.

You know I respect your views on this thread, but I do suggest that you should think that through more closely.

Yes - there is a 'obvious' issue that does not exist on the Scotland/England border that could reignite if a hard border was established between Ireland and N.I.

But - apart from that issue - can you not see the difficulties Scotland would face if there was a negotiation on a WA (which off course would have to be settled before there could be even a start on a future TA).

So, just as a starter:

As we in parallel discuss the divorce settlement - let's discuss how you are going to secure the integrity of the UK's SM. Please start by showing us your detailed proposals for border checks - no rush, we are happy to keep the negotiations going, no matter how long it takes, until you have proposals that we are 100% happy with - but you will have to accept that we have total control over what is acceptable......

 

[M18CTID]

If the effective outcome is going to be a customs border in the Irish Sea - whether explicit or implicit - I can't see the DUP or Farage suddenly having a road to Damascus moment. The ERG I wouldn't have a clue about, a lot of them voted for and against May's deal at different times.

I'm not sure why Farage is being mentioned in all this. His party don't have a single seat in parliament so he has about as much relevance to influencing a deal getting voted through (or not) as you or I, so he can kick off all he wants but there's fuck all he can do about it. The DUP is a different matter of course.

 

[mcfc1632]

Stop it free trade zone from the arctic to the Russian front or whatever it is you repeat ad nausea.

Good one - a quick search suggest that @Vic has posted that 60 times on this thread alone - so probably > 200 times in total

I had thought that the justification was that it needed repeating until the truth of it was accepted

Seems good advice @Vic ?

 

[lancs blue]

I'm not sure why Farage is being mentioned in all this. His party don't have a single seat in parliament so he has about as much relevance to influencing a deal getting voted through (or not) as you or I, so he can kick off all he wants but there's fuck all he can do about it. The DUP is a different matter of course.

You don't think Farage influences some of the Tory MPs at all??

 

[mcfc1632]

Ahhh but that's where you're wrong.

Apparently all the issues the SNP have found with a border between the UK and the EU will suddenly disappear.

It wont need to be a hard border and nor will any customs checks be needed.

Hell they will also continue to use our currency and central bank.

Now dont get me wrong i find that attitude eminently sensible and everything should be done to facilitate it happening because we are neighbours, not enemies and have a lot of trade to protect and it just needs agreements to be made.

Unfortunately for the SNP they have pissed on their own chips and can expect no favours if they go it alone.

TBF - I would expect the UK not to weaponise the border issue - but who knows in these febrile times

This is of course why Brexit is an existential issue for the SNP - if the UK leaves (genuinely) the EU before an Indyref2 - they will not be leaving the UK - so what is the point of them?

 

[George Hannah]

My original post referenced 1707 and 1801 as they were the Acts that framed the current situation, where's the confusion? I never mentioned Wales at all.

I repeat, my point is simply why start there rather than some other point in history to explain the context of the current situation?
Innumerable other events have shaped the present recrudescence of separatism, not least the massive failures of our two main political parties. Remember there are many in England who would welcome the independence of Scotland and Wales as a wearisome burden lifted, not my view and not I expect the majority view of the populations of those countries.

 

[Gareth Barry Conlon]

I assume that details are being kept quiet for now so as to give the ERG and Farage as little time as possible to kick off when they get to know the deal - all are strangely silent at the moment. I wonder if the deal will pass the acid test in the commons? Interesting times ahead.

If there is a deal being done my guess is it will be soft - softer than Mays WA and with a mechanism to shaft the DUP and leave NI in a BRINO zone. This could work as I have always said a soft deal would work - but does it get through the HoC? The ERG will go into melt down - the DUP will object etc. It would be soft tories and brexitey labour votes getting it through the HoC.

Passed subject to a 2nd Ref is also still a very real outcome. A very good outcome in my view as then we would have a genuine choice. A real / deliverable brexit option against remain.

A long way to go yet - some people getting ahead of themsleves.

 

[M18CTID]

You don't think Farage influences some of the Tory MPs at all??

That did cross my mind after I posted! He might get into the heads of a few but I don't think it would be a significant enough number to scupper things. As you say, even some of the ERG loons voted for May's deal. The key for me is getting enough Labour MPs to vote for a deal.

 

[Ric]

That is true, but in fairness I think we should all agree that a first meeting between the UK and the ROI in over three years has to be good news surely. I am certainly not counting chickens but I do know that we are all sick to death of the Brexit stagnation situation.

Well yes, a deal is clearly preferable to the no-deal scenario favoured by the extremists. Obviously I'd personally rather remain in the EU, and don't really see the point in a deal which leaves us worse off than we currently are, but I guess we'll just have to wait and see what exactly is being proposed.

 

[Len Rum]

I think point is Len, the legendary 'offer' you claim has been there for the taking for three years never actually made it into the legal text of a Withdrawal Treaty. If it had you can be assured that the current backstop sabotage clause would have been inserted to kill any chance of a HoC passage. That is why there is a collective holding of breath as the various parties now weigh their vital economic interests against the reality of No Deal. They are belatedly engaged in explaining how 'encouraging the return of terrorism' was really just about recognising the technical difference between a 'customs declaration' and a customs 'check'.

Nope.
Had we started off in July 2016 saying we wanted an arms length trade deal then we could have easily got to a deal including separate NI provisions
BUT
The country didn't know what it wanted
Then Mavis blew the election
Then Mavis got into bed with the DUP
Then she agreed a backstop she didn't have to ( not the EU's fault that if the British Govt accepts it,stop playing the victim George)
Then Parliament couldn't agree her deal
Then the country had a nervous breakdown
Now we've gone back to the no frills basic trade deal option with an NI carve out. It's not good from an economic viewpoint but we could have started negotiating here two years ago and repeat.

 

[Ancient Citizen]

To be fair, there are plenty of Remainers on here who are accepting of us leaving with a deal, and were upbeat about yesterday's meeting. I get the impression, however, that a few others would rather see Brexit turn out to be an unmitigated disaster than a success so they can come on here and say "I told you so". In a bizarre way, you could argue that they actually want No Deal to happen because it increases the likelihood of them being proven right. Hence why they were conspicuous by their absence last night following the positive noises coming out of the meeting between Johnson and Vardaker.

Their absence was because of trips taken from Iceland to the Russian border.

 

[George Hannah]

Nope.
Had we started off in July 2016 saying we wanted an arms length trade deal then we could have easily got to a deal including separate NI provisions
BUT
The country didn't know what it wanted
Then Mavis blew the election
Then Mavis got into bed with the DUP
Then she agreed a backstop she didn't have to ( not the EU's fault that if the British Govt accepts it,stop playing the victim George)
Then Parliament couldn't agree her deal
Then the country had a nervous breakdown
Now we've gone back to the no frills basic trade deal option with an NI carve out. It's not good from an economic viewpoint but we could have started negotiating here two years ago and repeat.

I can only repeat the first line of that list, it didn't happen - all the rest is either a consequence or speculation. We need to stick to the facts.

 

[mcfc1632]

I can only give you my opinion and it is you are as wrong as wrong can be.

Remain has been vocal for 3 years and rightly so but wait for leave to pipe up if a second ref is called and we are still in the EU.

That's not a threat per se, more of a promise.

But it only makes sense - why cannot people see it?

Why would the EU - who absolutely do not want the UK to Leave - ever offer anything other than a shit deal if they had the expectation that there would be a 2nd referendum - with Remain or the shit deal as the options.

I would vote Remain before I would vote for May's WA

This is just another version of the established EU method of - vote again until you get it right

A 2nd referendum would be a travesty of democracy - dressed up to make Remainers feel better about themselves

 

[mcfc1632]

Exactly, unfortunately May was a gullible fool to agree to the sequencing.

She was very badly 'supported' by that utter incompetent Robbins

 

[blueinsa]

She was very badly 'supported' by that utter incompetent Robbins

He was far from incompetent and to suggest so disguises his role in all this and his allegiances all along imo.

Committed remainer which isn't a crime btw, doing all he can to scupper the very thing he was tasked to do.

The country needed impartial and focused negotiators with the interests of the UK first and foremost.

 

[lancs blue]

I repeat, my point is simply why start there rather than some other point in history to explain the context of the current situation?
Innumerable other events have shaped the present recrudescence of separatism, not least the massive failures of our two main political parties. Remember there are many in England who would welcome the independence of Scotland and Wales as a wearisome burden lifted, not my view and not I expect the majority view of the populations of those countries.

Because many of those events had their roots in the 1707 and 1801 Acts of Union and the subsequent attitude of the Westminster-based government to those countries.

I suspect we'll just have to agree to disagree on this topic.

 

[mcfc1632]

Tired sigh. Where exactly did I say that?
Your ability to misinterpret, twist words and argue where no argument is needed is unbounded.

I was simply agreeing with @blueinsa that wether we leave or wether we stay there will be significant damage to the UK.
I believe there will be more damage if we leave. He believes there will be more damage if we stay.
I think we both respect each others position? (@blueinsa ). Now what the fuck is your beef? Or am I confused again? Like yesterday?

Just seemed to be the truth of what you were saying - so I cannot understand why you are touchy