Brexit Deal

[-:Undertaker:-]

It looks like this might be it folks, the Brexit Deal is about to be agreed.

Emergency Summit called in Brussels this evening

Sources suggest Britain and the European Union are about to agree and sign a Brexit Deal


http://www.unidiversidad.com.ar/cache_2/brexit-8_473_945_c.jpg

1051482076908834816

1051489123180191752

1051491434644340736

[FlyingJesus]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QuLX_S52gVc

Send in Ali G

[-:Undertaker:-]

Andddddd back again.

1051507355400187904

1051427407134113792

I said at the time of the last election, it was a good thing they needed the DUP.

Arlene and Company are there to prevent any tricks being pulled.

1051413954562527237

[-:Undertaker:-]

The wrangling is continuing and intensifying today, with the PM continuing to dither. The EU has raised possibility of extending transition for an extra year, with Downing Street slow to deny. Extending would cost us an extra £10bn. Her dithering is costing us a fortune.

1052883515954540544

1052877987492888577

1052857097484931073

1052681843118620672


The EU and the Irish Republic should be given the choice - either sign a Free Trade Deal with us on Canadian terms, and work out technological solutions to the border, or we go to No Deal - in which case the EU/the Republic will have to erect barriers with Ulster. Put the ball in THEIR court.

How dare they demand that Northern Ireland be partitioned from the rest of our kingdom, like an annexation.

[FlyingJesus]

I don't quite get the Ireland border problem - surely if we want to not put up a wall we simply don't, and if the EU wants there to be one they can pay for it on their land. Should be down to whoever wants it to be enforced

Anyway yeah this delay for an extra year plan is ridiculous and won't do anyone any good on either side of any of the current arguments. If May ends up pushing for that then it's time to push her out and risk whatever kerfuffles ensue from that

[dbgtz]

The wrangling is continuing and intensifying today, with the PM continuing to dither. The EU has raised possibility of extending transition for an extra year, with Downing Street slow to deny. Extending would cost us an extra £10bn. Her dithering is costing us a fortune.


Are you even paying UK tax right now?
You literally criticise me for "making it all about money" (or whatever you said) but can't seem to fathom why more time may be needed so we don't crash out, which even the biggest of brexit supporters say will impact the economy negatively. I believe it was Rees Mogg who said it would take 50 years or something to get to where we are now.
Also let's not forget the cost of having to implement new customs procedures. And the cost of productivity (and any other potential losses) for the lorries queuing in Dover. Etc.



The EU and the Irish Republic should be given the choice - either sign a Free Trade Deal with us on Canadian terms, and work out technological solutions to the border, or we go to No Deal - in which case the EU/the Republic will have to erect barriers with Ulster. Put the ball in THEIR court.

How dare they demand that Northern Ireland be partitioned from the rest of our kingdom, like an annexation.

You, and others who want a Brexit NOW!!!, seem really happy to demand without making any actual suggestion to a solution of the border issue. I think the key thing you're willfully ignoring is that our government agreed to the GFA, and to pull out of that not only weakens international opinion as you can't keep to your own deals, it also just makes you a bit of a dick.

Also just jumping up to the costs, how much do you think is going to get spent sorting out any troubles? And that's ignoring the bigger issue of people being hurt or killed.


I don't quite get the Ireland border problem - surely if we want to not put up a wall we simply don't, and if the EU wants there to be one they can pay for it on their land. Should be down to whoever wants it to be enforced

Anyway yeah this delay for an extra year plan is ridiculous and won't do anyone any good on either side of any of the current arguments. If May ends up pushing for that then it's time to push her out and risk whatever kerfuffles ensue from that

I don't really get you're reasoning here, you admit you don't quite get it but think instead of looking it up a bit more, you'll just state your opinion anyway?

The problem is that the EU has to put up a border between the SM and other countries, otherwise it fundamentally undermines the point of the single market. We'd effectively be able to trade with the EU freely through a back door but wouldn't have to follow EU regulations.

The big issue with all of this is that our government will blame the EU for this and people will eat it up.

[FlyingJesus]

I don't really get you're reasoning here, you admit you don't quite get it but think instead of looking it up a bit more, you'll just state your opinion anyway?

Yes because turns out I'm right


The problem is that the EU has to put up a border between the SM and other countries, otherwise it fundamentally undermines the point of the single market. We'd effectively be able to trade with the EU freely through a back door but wouldn't have to follow EU regulations

Exactly so it's their issue to pay for, not ours unless we want it to be

[dbgtz]

Yes because turns out I'm right

Exactly so it's their issue to pay for, not ours unless we want it to be

Hang on do you think this argument has been about money? The primary reason this is an issue is because of the GFA, not about making Ireland/EU pay for some wall. If the GFA just gets ignored then troubles could quite easily start again.

[FlyingJesus]

Again, we are not trying to undermine the agreement - the UK already said we're honouring the GFA. If the EU wants to border things off in a different way, it's not down to us to do anything about that once we're out. Their rules, their problem

[lawrawrrr]

Again, we are not trying to undermine the agreement - the UK already said we're honouring the GFA. If the EU wants to border things off in a different way, it's not down to us to do anything about that once we're out. Their rules, their problem
I kind of understand what you're saying but don't we have an obligation to make right?

If you were having an arugment with a flatmate for example and you had signed a contract, and one person decided to leave - that leaver doesn't get to say "your issue" and not pay out the rest of the contract?


or maybe a better non legal example that i was reading recently about retaining walls - there's no contract to keep that wall there but if the wall's owner decides to get rid of it they do have an obligation (there's a legal term for this) to provide an alternative or pay for any damages

[FlyingJesus]

It would be NICE of us to do so and I hope things do get sorted without having to put up a load of expensive and unsettling control points, but the onus isn't on us to make sure someone else's ideals are satisfied, only our own. The EU plans that would effectively mean Northern Ireland will be part of the EU and we can't trade with ourselves are ridiculous, and if they're going to make such demands then it's really just insulting to the entire process of negotiation

[-:Undertaker:-]

I agree with everything Tom wrote there about the border question.

And just to clarify, I wasn't some sort of headbanger who was demanding Brexit-this-second from day one. Throughout this process, I have advocated a Canada+++ FTA with the European Union. I even swallowed the transition period if that helped us reach that destination sensibly. I had red lines, but was open to co-operation on terrorism, security, aviation and so on. But the total opposite has happened - the EU is basically demanding the annexation of a part of our kingdom, or demanding the entire kingdom stay subject to it's customs duties and courts. It's intolerable. That's why I am now backing assuming that No Deal is what we're heading for, and that we prepare for that - if the EU wish to come back to the table to discuss an FTA then we'll leave the door open for that.

ITV's Robert Peston has written this on the situation tonight.

If the PM decided to cave-in on a Customs Union, it is hard to see how that would pass the House of Commons either. The Tory rebellion would be huge (over 100+) the DUP won't do it and Labour would jump on the opportunity to vote down the government and cause it's possible collapse.


Hello from Brussels and the EU Council that promised a Brexit breakthrough and delivered nothing.

So on the basis of conversations with well placed sources, this is how I think the Brexit talks are placed (WARNING: if you are fearful of a no-deal Brexit, or are of a nervous disposition, stop reading now).

1) Forget about having any clue when we leave about the nature and structure of the UK’s future trading relationship with the EU. The government heads of the EU27 have rejected Chequers. Wholesale. And they regard it as far too late to put in place the building blocks of that future relationship before we leave on 29 March 2019. So any Political Declaration on the future relationship will be waffly, vague and general. It will be what so many MPs detest: a blind Brexit. The PM may say that won’t happen. No one here (except perhaps her own Downing St team) believes her.

2) The earliest date for a deal on Brexit terms - that vacuous Political Declaration and the Withdrawal Agreement - is now the Council in mid December. But even that date may prove too challenging.

3) The gulf between the EU27 and May, as you know, is over how to keep open the Northern Ireland border. There is no chance of the EU abandoning its insistence that there should be a backstop - with no expiry date - of Northern Ireland, but not Great Britain, remaining in the Customs Union and the single market. That would involve the introduction of the commercial border in the Irish Sea that May says must never be drawn.

4) All efforts therefore from the UK are aimed at putting in place other arrangements to make it impossible for that backstop to be introduced.

5) Her ruse for doing this is the creation of another backstop that would involve the whole of the UK staying in something that looks like the customs union.

6) But she feels cannot commit to keeping the UK in the customs union forever, because her Brexiter MPs won’t let her. So it does not work as a backstop. And anyway the Article 50 rules say that the Withdrawal Agreement must not contain provisions for a permanent trading relationship between the whole of the UK and the EU. Which is a hideous Catch 22.

7) There is a solution. She could ignore her Brexiter critics and announce the UK wanted written into the Political Declaration - as opposed to the Withdrawal Agreement - that we would be staying permanently in the customs union. This is one bit of specificity the rest of the EU would allow into the Political Declaration. And it could be nodded at in the Withdrawal Agreement.

8) But if she announces we are staying in the Customs Union she would be crossing her reddest of red lines because she would have to abandon her ambition of negotiating free trade deals with non-EU countries. Liam Fox would be made redundant.

9) She knows, because her Brexit negotiator Olly Robbins has told her, that her best chance - probably her only chance of securing a Brexit deal - is to sign up for the customs union.

10) In its absence, no-deal Brexit is massively in play.

11) But a customs-union Brexit deal would see her Brexiter MPs become incandescent with fury.

12) Labour of course would be on the spot, since its one practical Brexit policy is to stay in the Customs Union.

13) This therefore is May’s Robert Peel moment. She could agree a Customs Union Brexit and get it through Parliament with Labour support - while simultaneously cleaving her own party in two.

14) It is a Customs Union Brexit, or leave the EU without a deal.

15) Which will May choose? Ultimately this is her choice, and hers alone. It is her moment in history.


162 days to go until Article 50, and Britain's EU membership, expire.

[dbgtz]

It would be NICE of us to do so and I hope things do get sorted without having to put up a load of expensive and unsettling control points, but the onus isn't on us to make sure someone else's ideals are satisfied, only our own. The EU plans that would effectively mean Northern Ireland will be part of the EU and we can't trade with ourselves are ridiculous, and if they're going to make such demands then it's really just insulting to the entire process of negotiation

I'm genuinely in disbelief you actually view it like this. We literally agreed to keeping the border as is. You cannot simply dump the problem on the other party and somehow claim that it's somehow on them to sort out. All this ignoring that without an agreement, we will have policing and all sorts set up as precaution to anything breaking out anyway.

If the UK could figure out a workable solution for all parties involved on this issue, then the EU would have no problem with NI being on par with rUK, but the only actual other solution is for Ireland to also leave (which laughably some extreme Eurosceptics have actually suggested). No brexit supporter is actually capable of suggesting anything which can actually work (see Undertaker simply saying "work out the technological solutions" as if that's an actual suggestion).


I agree with everything Tom wrote there about the border question.

And just to clarify, I wasn't some sort of headbanger who was demanding Brexit-this-second from day one. Throughout this process, I have advocated a Canada+++ FTA with the European Union. I even swallowed the transition period if that helped us reach that destination sensibly. I had red lines, but was open to co-operation on terrorism, security, aviation and so on. But the total opposite has happened - the EU is basically demanding the annexation of a part of our kingdom, or demanding the entire kingdom stay subject to it's customs duties and courts. It's intolerable. That's why I am now backing assuming that No Deal is what we're heading for, and that we prepare for that - if the EU wish to come back to the table to discuss an FTA then we'll leave the door open for that.

So what actually is a Canada+++ deal to you exactly? I see this thrown around but nobody actually clarifies what this entails. I also never saw this mentioned pre-referendum funnily enough.

You do realise whatever deal comes out of this, provided the big players stay, the EU is always going to have far more influence over things than us (which effectively can mean smaller states having more influence than us)? You can see just how widespread EU policy actually goes. GDPR is a very good example of this. I can't remember what this is called exactly, but I never really considered this until somewhat recently and just highlights how poor the whole "taking back control" argument is.

I think the problem is you care more about the country as an idea rather than the people as individuals.

[-:Undertaker:-]

I'm genuinely in disbelief you actually view it like this. We literally agreed to keeping the border as is. You cannot simply dump the problem on the other party and somehow claim that it's somehow on them to sort out. All this ignoring that without an agreement, we will have policing and all sorts set up as precaution to anything breaking out anyway.

If the UK could figure out a workable solution for all parties involved on this issue, then the EU would have no problem with NI being on par with rUK, but the only actual other solution is for Ireland to also leave (which laughably some extreme Eurosceptics have actually suggested). No brexit supporter is actually capable of suggesting anything which can actually work (see Undertaker simply saying "work out the technological solutions" as if that's an actual suggestion).

If the EU agreed to what is called 'Mutual recognition' within a Free Trade Agreement, then it would mean Britain being separate in terms of all laws and regulations but the EU recognising our standards and vice versa. This would be the solution to the issue. The problem is, the EU being a protectionist/anti-free trade body, does not want to do this - it fears British competitiveness undercutting EU industries. So the onus is on the European Union and the Republic of Ireland: it is EU created rules and principles we cannot possibly accept that they are demanding, not something that is somehow a universal fact in international politics.

For you to side with the European Union, actively seeking to either carve our kingdom into two parts or keep our entire kingdom subservient to European Union law without a say, is jaw dropping. That you'd side with a hostile organisation protecting it's own interests and political aims over your own country trying to protect our own interests and principles I just find incomprehensible. Your concern as a British subject should be the interests and unity of this realm, not that of the Irish Republic and EU. Realpolitik.


So what actually is a Canada+++ deal to you exactly? I see this thrown around but nobody actually clarifies what this entails. I also never saw this mentioned pre-referendum funnily enough.

A Canada+++ FTA is an FTA based on the Canadian model of high standards of mutual recognition of regulations/standards, with lower tariffs. The plus part is the recognition that Britain and the EU could continue in joint-programs such as anti-terrorism, Erasmus and so on - provided the ECJ is not the arbiter in any dispute mechanism. In summary, a high-grade FTA with additional co-operation in joint agencies. Now this is what we should be going for - but the EU says it will only accept this applying to Great Britain and not Northern Ireland.

Which as a result means we should now head to No Deal.


You do realise whatever deal comes out of this, provided the big players stay, the EU is always going to have far more influence over things than us (which effectively can mean smaller states having more influence than us)? You can see just how widespread EU policy actually goes. GDPR is a very good example of this. I can't remember what this is called exactly, but I never really considered this until somewhat recently and just highlights how poor the whole "taking back control" argument is.

I think the problem is you care more about the country as an idea rather than the people as individuals.

Well what you've just admitted to me here is what we've said all along but which you all denied, which is that the scope and influence of the European Union and it's body of law have infested this country like a rampant Japanese knotwood, to a degree many did not realise - and that we have been deeply embedded in this embryonic superstate.

To which my answer simply is, thank god we've extracting ourselves now before this Devil's Snare is wrapped around our throat.

[FlyingJesus]

I'm genuinely in disbelief you actually view it like this. We literally agreed to keeping the border as is.

Which means not doing anything lol. Shockingly, if you change things that means it's NOT the same.

Not sure why you think it's laughable to make Ireland leave the EU but 100% perfect planning to force NI to leave Britain and join the EU. Neither of those are good plans at all

[-:Undertaker:-]

Increasing talk from Westminster that David Davis is being lined up as a 'caretaker' PM to steer through Brexit. Unlike Boris, Davis is more popular among both wings of the party and also had more credit with Labour MPs. His article in the Sunday Mail this weekend (https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6298839/Former-Brexit-secretary-David-Davis-threatens-No-Fly-Zone-EU-planes-UK-airspace.html) does suggest a leadership bid.

1053209939504709634

If Davis and Boris can work out a joint-ticket, meaning no contest, then it makes it more likely the PM will be removed. There's a 1922 meeting this Wednesday and there's demands the PM shows up, with one MP saying "bring your own noose". (https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6298561/Theresa-faces-trial-Tory-MPs.html) We'll see what happens this week. It's worth remembering that she has only lasted this long because of the lack of an obvious successor - if this is changing then things could move very quickly.

As a Tory member, I feel she has run out of road. Time to make the move.

[dbgtz]

If the EU agreed to what is called 'Mutual recognition' within a Free Trade Agreement, then it would mean Britain being separate in terms of all laws and regulations but the EU recognising our standards and vice versa. This would be the solution to the issue. The problem is, the EU being a protectionist/anti-free trade body, does not want to do this - it fears British competitiveness undercutting EU industries. So the onus is on the European Union and the Republic of Ireland: it is EU created rules and principles we cannot possibly accept that they are demanding, not something that is somehow a universal fact in international politics.

What you've actually just said is the EU wouldn't want that because the UK would lower regulation standards and become some kind of back door for poorly regulated goods. No shit it wouldn't want that lmao
But if that was the solution then why has it never been mentioned?



For you to side with the European Union, actively seeking to either carve our kingdom into two parts or keep our entire kingdom subservient to European Union law without a say, is jaw dropping. That you'd side with a hostile organisation protecting it's own interests and political aims over your own country trying to protect our own interests and principles I just find incomprehensible. Your concern as a British subject should be the interests and unity of this realm, not that of the Irish Republic and EU. Realpolitik.


Christ that second to last sentence really put a bad taste in my mouth. I'm an individual who is allowed their own thoughts, I should not have to default to supporting something I have no desire to support because I happened to be born in some place. You're borderline telling me how to think. I never even said I supported the deal, just that people like you are so against it but can't suggest anything else that could actually work.



Well what you've just admitted to me here is what we've said all along but which you all denied, which is that the scope and influence of the European Union and it's body of law have infested this country like a rampant Japanese knotwood, to a degree many did not realise - and that we have been deeply embedded in this embryonic superstate.

To which my answer simply is, thank god we've extracting ourselves now before this Devil's Snare is wrapped around our throat.

That's not what I said at all, you've literally just put words in my mouth to suit your own agenda. What I said is EU laws are extremely influential (similar to California & rUSA) and that they will always have more influence than us as a 3rd party. This is most likely the "mid eurosceptics" (ie the reform from within) want to remain in, because a lot of EU legislation will likely affect us anyway.


Which means not doing anything lol. Shockingly, if you change things that means it's NOT the same.

Not sure why you think it's laughable to make Ireland leave the EU but 100% perfect planning to force NI to leave Britain and join the EU. Neither of those are good plans at all

NI = part of UK
ROI = independent nation

we cannot force an independent nation to do something it does not want to do, that is why it's laughable
also some suggestions that ROI should join the UK, which is also laughable

they're also not forcing anything, we chose to leave and they propose a solution


Increasing talk from Westminster that David Davis is being lined up as a 'caretaker' PM to steer through Brexit. Unlike Boris, Davis is more popular among both wings of the party and also had more credit with Labour MPs. His article in the Sunday Mail this weekend (https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6298839/Former-Brexit-secretary-David-Davis-threatens-No-Fly-Zone-EU-planes-UK-airspace.html) does suggest a leadership bid.

1053209939504709634

If Davis and Boris can work out a joint-ticket, meaning no contest, then it makes it more likely the PM will be removed. There's a 1922 meeting this Wednesday and there's demands the PM shows up, with one MP saying "bring your own noose". (https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6298561/Theresa-faces-trial-Tory-MPs.html) We'll see what happens this week. It's worth remembering that she has only lasted this long because of the lack of an obvious successor - if this is changing then things could move very quickly.

As a Tory member, I feel she has run out of road. Time to make the move.

Cool, let's get the guy who did nothing for 2 years as Brexit secretary to run the country in some dodgy back door deals to prop up some self serving charlatans. How democratic

[-:Undertaker:-]

What you've actually just said is the EU wouldn't want that because the UK would lower regulation standards and become some kind of back door for poorly regulated goods. No shit it wouldn't want that lmao
But if that was the solution then why has it never been mentioned?

You seem to be under the impression that European Union standards and regulations are there for a valid reason, and that anything that deviates from them is somehow poorly regulated. Let's take food for example - EU regulations, the CAP, is a barrier to non-EU food products no doubt under the guise of safety and the rest of it. But we all know it is purposely highly-regulated in order to protect French farmers from outside competition, a price that means the European continent pays more for its food than it has to.

Britain would understandably wish to open ourselves up to cheaper markets in food and other areas, while the EU will not. In doing so, we'd risk upsetting their protectionist apple cart in that we'd be importing raw materials cheaper and thus being able to undercut them. That is *their problem* and a fault of their muddled and backwards thinking, not ours. This has all been mentioned before, but the EU rules it out as it fears an actual competitor on its doorstep. So like I say, if that's the case then let's go for No Deal.


Christ that second to last sentence really put a bad taste in my mouth. I'm an individual who is allowed their own thoughts, I should not have to default to supporting something I have no desire to support because I happened to be born in some place. You're borderline telling me how to think. I never even said I supported the deal, just that people like you are so against it but can't suggest anything else that could actually work.

I'm asking you to justify how you think - how on EARTH can you think slicing your country in two on the demand of a hostile foreign power is in anyway acceptable? This is *our* country - you and me, not their country as the referendum made clear.


That's not what I said at all, you've literally just put words in my mouth to suit your own agenda. What I said is EU laws are extremely influential (similar to California & rUSA) and that they will always have more influence than us as a 3rd party. This is most likely the "mid eurosceptics" (ie the reform from within) want to remain in, because a lot of EU legislation will likely affect us anyway.


Reform from within - what reforms did the UK ever secure and how did David Cameron's reforms go?


NI = part of UK
ROI = independent nation

we cannot force an independent nation to do something it does not want to do, that is why it's laughable
also some suggestions that ROI should join the UK, which is also laughable

they're also not forcing anything, we chose to leave and they propose a solution

Forcing an independent nation to do something it does not want to do - ah yes, like the EU is attempting to force us into slicing Northern Ireland away from us or accepting their continued rule without a say, like a sort of vassal state. It's remarkable a paragraph or two above you wouldn't even defend your own country from this, yet here you are defending the sovereignty of the Irish Republic.


Cool, let's get the guy who did nothing for 2 years as Brexit secretary to run the country in some dodgy back door deals to prop up some self serving charlatans. How democratic

Mr Davis is an elected MP part of an elected British government, so yes - very democratic.

When exactly did we elect Mr Barnier, Mr Tusk and Mr Varadkar? I must have been asleep.

[FlyingJesus]

NI = part of UK
ROI = independent nation

we cannot force an independent nation to do something it does not want to do, that is why it's laughable

UK = independent nation

The EU cannot force an independent nation to do something it does not want to do, that is why trying to slice up the UK is laughable. It's not a solution (to a problem they have), it's an aggressive insult that smacks of divide and conquer empire building

[dbgtz]

You seem to be under the impression that European Union standards and regulations are there for a valid reason, and that anything that deviates from them is somehow poorly regulated. Let's take food for example - EU regulations, the CAP, is a barrier to non-EU food products no doubt under the guise of safety and the rest of it. But we all know it is purposely highly-regulated in order to protect French farmers from outside competition, a price that means the European continent pays more for its food than it has to.

Britain would understandably wish to open ourselves up to cheaper markets in food and other areas, while the EU will not. In doing so, we'd risk upsetting their protectionist apple cart in that we'd be importing raw materials cheaper and thus being able to undercut them. That is *their problem* and a fault of their muddled and backwards thinking, not ours. This has all been mentioned before, but the EU rules it out as it fears an actual competitor on its doorstep. So like I say, if that's the case then let's go for No Deal.


Didn't you just argue that being out of the EU means that wages will go up for UK farmers, fruit pickers and the such (jobs typically fulfilled by migrants) but now you're basically saying we're going to be suggested by cheap food from elsewhere which would actually put these people out of a job? Which is it you're hoping for exactly? To me it sounds like you're hoping a bunch of our farms get bankrupted, which to me sounds like a terrible idea to be even more reliant on food imports than we already are.

I also didn't know the CAP and food regulations were specifically designed to protect French farmers, got evidence for that? What regulations to you presume to be part of this conspiracy exactly? The ones that banned a potential carcogenic to be poured over apples until proven safe? The ones where you have to label allergens? Or the ones where you can't abuse the animals involved? Do enlighten me as to what exactly you are hoping our government disposes of.



I'm asking you to justify how you think - how on EARTH can you think slicing your country in two on the demand of a hostile foreign power is in anyway acceptable? This is *our* country - you and me, not their country as the referendum made clear.


eh read my last sentence in what you just replied to
if I were Irish though I could say that the British split Ireland to begin with



Reform from within - what reforms did the UK ever secure and how did David Cameron's reforms go?


I never voted Conservative?



Forcing an independent nation to do something it does not want to do - ah yes, like the EU is attempting to force us into slicing Northern Ireland away from us or accepting their continued rule without a say, like a sort of vassal state. It's remarkable a paragraph or two above you wouldn't even defend your own country from this, yet here you are defending the sovereignty of the Irish Republic.


They're not forcing anything. Suggest a workable solution and they would be happy to do it



Mr Davis is an elected MP part of an elected British government, so yes - very democratic.

When exactly did we elect Mr Barnier, Mr Tusk and Mr Varadkar? I must have been asleep.

When did I vote David Davies exactly? I could turn this back into another "our system is shit" but that'll just go in circles.


UK = independent nation

The EU cannot force an independent nation to do something it does not want to do, that is why trying to slice up the UK is laughable. It's not a solution (to a problem they have), it's an aggressive insult that smacks of divide and conquer empire building

Except they haven't forced us to do anything so your point falls flat. I really can't understand how you see our shared border as solely their problem.

[FlyingJesus]

We haven't forced them to do anything either, the entire point is that both sides are TRYING to for shit reasons with shit outcomes. I really can't understand how you're seeing one side asking the other to secede territory as horrific and the other as being totally reasonable and wonderful and oh my what a lovely bunch of chaps

[-:Undertaker:-]

Didn't you just argue that being out of the EU means that wages will go up for UK farmers, fruit pickers and the such (jobs typically fulfilled by migrants) but now you're basically saying we're going to be suggested by cheap food from elsewhere which would actually put these people out of a job? Which is it you're hoping for exactly? To me it sounds like you're hoping a bunch of our farms get bankrupted, which to me sounds like a terrible idea to be even more reliant on food imports than we already are.

I also didn't know the CAP and food regulations were specifically designed to protect French farmers, got evidence for that? What regulations to you presume to be part of this conspiracy exactly? The ones that banned a potential carcogenic to be poured over apples until proven safe? The ones where you have to label allergens? Or the ones where you can't abuse the animals involved? Do enlighten me as to what exactly you are hoping our government disposes of.

How many times do I have to state this principle? The entire point of Brexit isn't what just you or I think should happen policy-wise, it is for all of us to decide in our sovereign Parliament. So yes, if the country decides to liberalise agricultural trade policy for cheaper food but that this also results in uncompetitive British farms going out of business, then that is a decision for this country to make alone. It could also go the opposite way, the point is that *we* decide the policy and not French farming unions.

The reality as to what would happen in regards to farming, one could see more exotic non-British products which are grown on the continent such as grapes, olives, oranges, lemons, limes, dates and so on being imported from Africa, South America and Asia instead of Europe because of the price difference. This wouldn't hurt British farmers, would benefit Commonwealth countries but *would* hurt the protectionist European market. So you can see why they fear a competitive, free and unchained Britain - as they openly say;

1053226367272341505

1053240609618702338


eh read my last sentence in what you just replied to
if I were Irish though I could say that the British split Ireland to begin with

The British never split Ireland, the Irish split Ireland. Ireland as a concept, much like India, did not exist prior to English and later British rule. It was southern Ireland which decided to leave the realm, and it was Northern Ireland who decided to remain in the Union.

It sounds to me like you are actually questioning the legitimacy of your very own country.


I never voted Conservative?

I asked, what reforms had Britain achieved/could achieve by staying in the EU?


They're not forcing anything. Suggest a workable solution and they would be happy to do it

Yes because they are so reasonable.


When did I vote David Davies exactly? I could turn this back into another "our system is shit" but that'll just go in circles.


Instead you seem to prefer a system where most people, including those marching on the streets of London yesterday, couldn't name more than one official who works for it. That's a really great, accountable and democratic system. Can you name the Commission? Because I read this stuff everyday and have done for over a decade and I can't name one Commissioner apart from the Commission President.


Except they haven't forced us to do anything so your point falls flat. I really can't understand how you see our shared border as solely their problem.

They haven't forced us to do anything?

They've literally just said to us the choice is between splitting Northern Ireland off from the rest of our country, or accepting continued EU rule with the backstop. Yet just earlier you were questioning how some could dare tell the Irish Republic what to do.

[-:Undertaker:-]

More tonight on our dithering PM. Not looking good for her.

1054108454871285760


While it emerges that the EU is demanding it has control over Britain's tax regime after Brexit. It's astounding.

Are you going to defend this? dbgtz;

1053383235378536448

[dbgtz]

We haven't forced them to do anything either, the entire point is that both sides are TRYING to for shit reasons with shit outcomes. I really can't understand how you're seeing one side asking the other to secede territory as horrific and the other as being totally reasonable and wonderful and oh my what a lovely bunch of chaps

So I haven't actually said I support the splitting of NI from rUK so good one there, and asking ROI to join in leaving is laughable because of the high EU support.

A big potential problem here for uk nationalists is that the trends in NI are shifting to unified Ireland, and having that hard border could be some deciding factor for a lot of people just to avoid the violence if nothing else. Alternatively, it could swing the completely other way but who knows. Hopefully there is no hard border regardless.


How many times do I have to state this principle? The entire point of Brexit isn't what just you or I think should happen policy-wise, it is for all of us to decide in our sovereign Parliament. So yes, if the country decides to liberalise agricultural trade policy for cheaper food but that this also results in uncompetitive British farms going out of business, then that is a decision for this country to make alone. It could also go the opposite way, the point is that *we* decide the policy and not French farming unions.

The reality as to what would happen in regards to farming, one could see more exotic non-British products which are grown on the continent such as grapes, olives, oranges, lemons, limes, dates and so on being imported from Africa, South America and Asia instead of Europe because of the price difference. This wouldn't hurt British farmers, would benefit Commonwealth countries but *would* hurt the protectionist European market. So you can see why they fear a competitive, free and unchained Britain - as they openly say;

1053226367272341505

1053240609618702338


Then why are you boasting about pay going up and such in one thread when post brexit could see that completely change that? You're making completely contradictory points in an effort to be right. I get you like the idea of it being all decided in Westminster, but that's not related to what I said.

Speaking of contradictory points, you constantly say something like "we're the 5th/6th largest economy (generally over France) why wouldn't xyz" but somehow we're being bent over the barrel by French farmers? How does this change post-brexit exactly? Surely as the second biggest in the EU we should have more clout in that than the world general world? The point you're trying to make here really isn't well thought out.

Again on your imports blah blah actually point me to some figures and I might believe this, but the thing right now is we do import such items from outside the EU anyway. Did you not see this? https://metro.co.uk/2018/09/25/brexit-mps-tweet-about-foreign-lemons-didnt-go-down-too-well-7976838/

I get your whole point is the "shifting" of power to Westminster but you're backing your points on poor assumptions.



The British never split Ireland, the Irish split Ireland. Ireland as a concept, much like India, did not exist prior to English and later British rule. It was southern Ireland which decided to leave the realm, and it was Northern Ireland who decided to remain in the Union.

It sounds to me like you are actually questioning the legitimacy of your very own country.


"If I were Irish"
almost as if there's more than one way to look at things



I asked, what reforms had Britain achieved/could achieve by staying in the EU?


Right, but I never voted Conservative. I never believed DC would try to do anything to be quite honest. If TM remains PM for the next few years, it goes awfully and I asked "why did it go so bad?" you would simply say that you had no faith in TM to deliver due to her "mixed opinion" shall we call it. You never asked me what it could achieve and it's too late for me to go into it right now. I'll look at that an UK influence tomorrow or Tuesday and get back to you on that.



Yes because they are so reasonable.


Well, yes... You just need to suggest something which can actually work. I don't understand why you think the EU are really that insistent on keeping NI in I'm sure they're a net beneficiary, it is purely to avoid troubles and keep to the GFA.



Instead you seem to prefer a system where most people, including those marching on the streets of London yesterday, couldn't name more than one official who works for it. That's a really great, accountable and democratic system. Can you name the Commission? Because I read this stuff everyday and have done for over a decade and I can't name one Commissioner apart from the Commission President.


If it wasn't for media nobody would know who Theresa May was... But sure as hell everyone knows the Kardashians, One Direction, Ed Sheeran blah blah.
So long as you can easily find out, why does it matter for me to remember their name? How is this a judge of anything other than how plastered they are over the media? I don't know the environment secretary but a quick look means I can see it's Gove which I did kind of know but I thought he resigned with the rest of them. I can also do the same for the EU commission.



They haven't forced us to do anything?

They've literally just said to us the choice is between splitting Northern Ireland off from the rest of our country, or accepting continued EU rule with the backstop. Yet just earlier you were questioning how some could dare tell the Irish Republic what to do.

I just found it laughable how out of touch it was for some to say ROI should leave given EU support there is at 92%.
When have they said those are the only choices? They're pretty open to suggestions from what I've read but nobody on leave can actually provide something which works (on paper) for both sides. I could understand the frustration if it was completely workable and they're just being stubborn, but as much as you'd love to believe that, they're not.

I'll have to reply to your second post tomorrow as I only just noticed it + it's paywalled and I want to go to bed

[FlyingJesus]

So I haven't actually said I support the splitting of NI from rUK so good one there, and asking ROI to join in leaving is laughable because of the high EU support.

Cool story, and I never said that Ireland should leave the EU but you seem to think I'm a supporter of that idea for some reason. Let's try asking AGAIN: how is it that asking Ireland to leave the EU is terrible but asking NI to leave the UK somehow isn't? That's all I'm getting at here, your inconsistency

[-:Undertaker:-]

The bloc publically committing themselves to voting down any deal with the NI backstop in has now reached 41 Tory MPs.

1054269886392946688

And IDS and Owen Paterson of the ERG group have just met Barnier in Brussels with Canada+++ proposals.

1054330581495017478


So I haven't actually said I support the splitting of NI from rUK so good one there, and asking ROI to join in leaving is laughable because of the high EU support.

So you agree with myself, the Tory Party and the DUP that any splitting Northern Ireland away from the rest of the United Kingdom by remaining in the Customs Union/Single Market via a backstop is completely unacceptable? If so, we are in agreement.


A big potential problem here for uk nationalists is that the trends in NI are shifting to unified Ireland, and having that hard border could be some deciding factor for a lot of people just to avoid the violence if nothing else. Alternatively, it could swing the completely other way but who knows. Hopefully there is no hard border regardless.

It was said prior to the referendum that a Leave vote would result in a surge in Scottish independence, instead we've had the opposite effect. I have always said that EU membership weakens larger countries such as Britain, Spain and Italy because it encourages smaller breakaway states in that instead of looking to London/Madrid/Rome they can look to Brussels. Once Britain is out of the EU, the debate will drastically change: it will be Scottish Nationalists and Irish Republicans who will have to argue for leaving the UK Single Market, UK Customs Union, joining Schengen and adopting the Euro currency.


Then why are you boasting about pay going up and such in one thread when post brexit could see that completely change that? You're making completely contradictory points in an effort to be right. I get you like the idea of it being all decided in Westminster, but that's not related to what I said.

Post-Brexit it could go either way depending on what we decide. We could adopt policies totally the opposite to what I want, and I could see it all go to pot. But I didn't vote Brexit to get solely what I want - I voted it so the country can get what it wants.

For example, EU rules in regards to the Single Market curb a lot of what a Corbyn-style government would want to do in terms of business freedom. That's something I am in agreement with the EU on. But how wrong would that be of me, to use a foreign power to overrule my fellow Britons who have elected a (crazy) Marxist government. It's all about legitimacy in my eyes.


Speaking of contradictory points, you constantly say something like "we're the 5th/6th largest economy (generally over France) why wouldn't xyz" but somehow we're being bent over the barrel by French farmers? How does this change post-brexit exactly? Surely as the second biggest in the EU we should have more clout in that than the world general world? The point you're trying to make here really isn't well thought out.

We're bent over the barrel by French farmers because we're locked into a system where we have a small % of votes, QMV, other nations generally back France and Germany as the drivers of the project, and where the ECJ then enforces it whether we like it or not. That's not to say our governments' haven't been pathetically weak as well.

Outside of that system, we sign FTAs on our own. It'll be entirely our choice whether to sign these FTAs. If America, Japan or China demand unacceptable terms, then we simply don't sign an agreement with them. It really is that simple. Flexibility.


Again on your imports blah blah actually point me to some figures and I might believe this, but the thing right now is we do import such items from outside the EU anyway. Did you not see this? https://metro.co.uk/2018/09/25/brexit-mps-tweet-about-foreign-lemons-didnt-go-down-too-well-7976838/

I haven't got figures but you can apply the logic to any number of things. I've read before how as a result of EU procurement in defence, we've paid a fortune for less than reliable military equipment when the American stuff was half the price and far superior. It's this mixing of European federalist politics that has poisoned our economic thinking. The EU is political, not economic; always remember that.


I get your whole point is the "shifting" of power to Westminster but you're backing your points on poor assumptions.


I don't make any assumptions, like I said I have ideas and opinions as to how Britain should run itself once independent but that isn't my decision alone to take. We could make a huge mess of it, correct. But I would rather make a mess of it ourselves than be run from abroad. Besides, generally I think good governance comes from independent, medium-sized nation states.


Right, but I never voted Conservative. I never believed DC would try to do anything to be quite honest. If TM remains PM for the next few years, it goes awfully and I asked "why did it go so bad?" you would simply say that you had no faith in TM to deliver due to her "mixed opinion" shall we call it. You never asked me what it could achieve and it's too late for me to go into it right now. I'll look at that an UK influence tomorrow or Tuesday and get back to you on that.

I asked two remainer friends who were arguing for reform, and asked what reforms would you propose that would stand a chance of being accepted and adopted by the European Union. Would be interesting to hear your thoughts.


Well, yes... You just need to suggest something which can actually work. I don't understand why you think the EU are really that insistent on keeping NI in I'm sure they're a net beneficiary, it is purely to avoid troubles and keep to the GFA.

They're using Ulster as a crowbar to keep us tied to the continental system. Politics 101.


If it wasn't for media nobody would know who Theresa May was... But sure as hell everyone knows the Kardashians, One Direction, Ed Sheeran blah blah.
So long as you can easily find out, why does it matter for me to remember their name? How is this a judge of anything other than how plastered they are over the media? I don't know the environment secretary but a quick look means I can see it's Gove which I did kind of know but I thought he resigned with the rest of them. I can also do the same for the EU commission.

It matters because in any democratic system it is important that people generally understand the concept so the democratic process is transparent. This is true in the Westminster system: you have the Crown, and HM Government appointed from Parliament. The European Union system on the other hand was always intended to be complex, as it helped hide what was being created. I have studied this for years and I still cannot fully grasp it. It's *designed* to be that way as it avoids accountability.


I just found it laughable how out of touch it was for some to say ROI should leave given EU support there is at 92%.
When have they said those are the only choices? They're pretty open to suggestions from what I've read but nobody on leave can actually provide something which works (on paper) for both sides. I could understand the frustration if it was completely workable and they're just being stubborn, but as much as you'd love to believe that, they're not.

I'll have to reply to your second post tomorrow as I only just noticed it + it's paywalled and I want to go to bed

Indeed, which is why I now believe the solution is No Deal.

[Zak]

I don't understand the pessimism? I know very little about this stuff but things aren't getting better?.. surely it's time to change direction?

I've spoken with a lot of the older generation, ones that fought for what we have. I saw no fear, they genuinely think that leaving the EU will be best for this country. You can't tell me my Granddad (90) doesn't have my interests at heart? Or Norman (97), a family friend, doesn't have his grandchildren and great-grandchildren's interests at heart?

[dbgtz]

Cool story, and I never said that Ireland should leave the EU but you seem to think I'm a supporter of that idea for some reason. Let's try asking AGAIN: how is it that asking Ireland to leave the EU is terrible but asking NI to leave the UK somehow isn't? That's all I'm getting at here, your inconsistency

first of all, NI wouldn't be leaving the UK
second of all, I never said I supported it so what point are you trying to make exactly?



So you agree with myself, the Tory Party and the DUP that any splitting Northern Ireland away from the rest of the United Kingdom by remaining in the Customs Union/Single Market via a backstop is completely unacceptable? If so, we are in agreement.


If it was temporary as a means to an end? Sure, but obviously not on the cards.
I feel like the most appropriate thing would be another referendum specifically for NI, given that NI did technically vote to to remain. Obviously this would never happen for the intevitable backlash elsewhere.



It was said prior to the referendum that a Leave vote would result in a surge in Scottish independence, instead we've had the opposite effect. I have always said that EU membership weakens larger countries such as Britain, Spain and Italy because it encourages smaller breakaway states in that instead of looking to London/Madrid/Rome they can look to Brussels. Once Britain is out of the EU, the debate will drastically change: it will be Scottish Nationalists and Irish Republicans who will have to argue for leaving the UK Single Market, UK Customs Union, joining Schengen and adopting the Euro currency.


I said outright it was pure speculation and the opposite could happen, however looking at the figures the referendum had little impact. It was pretty consistently no before and after the referendum bar a brief surge immediately after in favour of yes, which might actually be more down to DC resigning. It will be something to assess later down the line.



Post-Brexit it could go either way depending on what we decide. We could adopt policies totally the opposite to what I want, and I could see it all go to pot. But I didn't vote Brexit to get solely what I want - I voted it so the country can get what it wants.

For example, EU rules in regards to the Single Market curb a lot of what a Corbyn-style government would want to do in terms of business freedom. That's something I am in agreement with the EU on. But how wrong would that be of me, to use a foreign power to overrule my fellow Britons who have elected a (crazy) Marxist government. It's all about legitimacy in my eyes.


Lots of coulds and shoulds basically, no actual substance. Fundamentally, you have just made completely contradictory points to show Brexit is a good thing to the individual who looks at this economically.



We're bent over the barrel by French farmers because we're locked into a system where we have a small % of votes, QMV, other nations generally back France and Germany as the drivers of the project, and where the ECJ then enforces it whether we like it or not. That's not to say our governments' haven't been pathetically weak as well.

Outside of that system, we sign FTAs on our own. It'll be entirely our choice whether to sign these FTAs. If America, Japan or China demand unacceptable terms, then we simply don't sign an agreement with them. It really is that simple. Flexibility.


Are you talking about the EU Parliament here? Curious to see what numbers you're actually looking at. I'm looking at some LSE study for the Council which does put us at the end, but actually Germany isn't far off us so you must be looking at something else.
Also we have the joint 3rd most seats with Italy. France has 1 more than us, presumably because of how France overseas territories are still technically France. Germany is on 99 going down to 96. In the context of other member states, that's pretty high and if you can argue that winning an election with a plurality by a few percent, or that winning a referendum by <4% is a significant majority, then I think it's fair to say the 9.7% we have is pretty darn big.



I haven't got figures but you can apply the logic to any number of things. I've read before how as a result of EU procurement in defence, we've paid a fortune for less than reliable military equipment when the American stuff was half the price and far superior. It's this mixing of European federalist politics that has poisoned our economic thinking. The EU is political, not economic; always remember that.


When have we done this? The only example I can think of is Maggie Thatcher buying US helicopters instead of from BAE (a UK company). We have tonnes of US equipment and we, along with other European countries, purchased (and possibly contributed to?) the notably infamous F-35 from them (which, by the way, has been surrounded by all sorts of controversy regarding poor design/management). Literally just google it and see how much equipment we get from the US.



I don't make any assumptions, like I said I have ideas and opinions as to how Britain should run itself once independent but that isn't my decision alone to take. We could make a huge mess of it, correct. But I would rather make a mess of it ourselves than be run from abroad. Besides, generally I think good governance comes from independent, medium-sized nation states.


Yes, you did make a poor assumption. You assume in some relevant case scenario fruit will be cheaper, yet the EU already has a lot of FTA with countries meaning cheap food from non-EU countries.

Also does this mean you're hoping for the splitting of the USA, China and other non-medium states? Or would that then make us large states so we just endlessly break up?



I asked two remainer friends who were arguing for reform, and asked what reforms would you propose that would stand a chance of being accepted and adopted by the European Union. Would be interesting to hear your thoughts.


A directly elected President and a change from the voting system they have in place, which I'm not a huge fan of personally.



They're using Ulster as a crowbar to keep us tied to the continental system. Politics 101.


Or maybe they're simply acting on behalf of a member state who doesn't want the violence and death?



It matters because in any democratic system it is important that people generally understand the concept so the democratic process is transparent. This is true in the Westminster system: you have the Crown, and HM Government appointed from Parliament. The European Union system on the other hand was always intended to be complex, as it helped hide what was being created. I have studied this for years and I still cannot fully grasp it. It's *designed* to be that way as it avoids accountability.


Not to be offensive, but just because you don't understand something doesn't make it complex.



Indeed, which is why I now believe the solution is No Deal.

cool have fun in Spain


I don't understand the pessimism? I know very little about this stuff but things aren't getting better?.. surely it's time to change direction?

I've spoken with a lot of the older generation, ones that fought for what we have. I saw no fear, they genuinely think that leaving the EU will be best for this country. You can't tell me my Granddad (90) doesn't have my interests at heart? Or Norman (97), a family friend, doesn't have his grandchildren and great-grandchildren's interests at heart?

In the nicest way possible, just because they may have their interests at heart doesn't actually mean they understand it or that it's right. You don't just change direction in the hope you don't drive into a lake, you look at a map first and that's actually a lot of peoples problems. The whole process was started with no clear direction from government, and there really is still no clear direction to this day.

[Zak]

In the nicest way possible, just because they may have their interests at heart doesn't actually mean they understand it or that it's right. You don't just change direction in the hope you don't drive into a lake, you look at a map first and that's actually a lot of peoples problems. The whole process was started with no clear direction from government, and there really is still no clear direction to this day.

Yeah I see your point and agree. On the #LosersVoteMarch thread I mentioned the voters not understanding the implications of Leave. Frustrating to say the least! And yes a total lack of direction from the Government.

[FlyingJesus]

first of all, NI wouldn't be leaving the UK

If there was an EU-imposed border across the Irish Sea then yes, that is exactly what would be happening


second of all, I never said I supported it

You literally said it was the only option other than getting Ireland to join the UK, which yes is laughable but leads to:


so what point are you trying to make exactly?

The same thing I've been saying for the past few posts, quite possibly. Words are haaaaaaaaaard


Not sure why you think it's laughable to make Ireland leave the EU but 100% perfect planning to force NI to leave Britain and join the EU. Neither of those are good plans at all

I really can't understand how you're seeing one side asking the other to secede territory as horrific and the other as being totally reasonable and wonderful and oh my what a lovely bunch of chaps
​
Let's try asking AGAIN: how is it that asking Ireland to leave the EU is terrible but asking NI to leave the UK somehow isn't?

[-:Undertaker:-]

148 days to go lads.


https://media.giphy.com/media/9GIi19QkdAjrdfvjfu/giphy.gif




An interesting poll Guido has picked out following the budget.

https://order-order.com/2018/10/30/go-52-vs-48-no-deal/


https://i2.wp.com/order-order.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/10/no-deal-poll.jpg?resize=540%2C333&ssl=1



A Hanbury Strategy snap poll for Politico following the Budget has found that there is a 52% – 48% split on whether no deal would be a problem for public finances or not.

48% of the country agreed with the statement that “No Deal will mean there will be less money for public services – and it is NOT a price worth paying.” Whilst 52% of the country believe that “No Deal” either “will mean there will be less money for public services – and it is a price worth paying” or “won’t lead to less money for public services.” Nothing has changed…

Rather worrying numbers for Number 10 as if they come back with a crap deal then it appears the public is largely immune (yet again) from dire warnings about a No Deal Brexit, thus alievating the pressure on backbench MPs to back the deal and saving Number 10's bacon.

More and more likely the "deal" will be vague and meaningless so it passes before the departure date - a so-called "blind Brexit".