Brexit - or Article 50: the Phoenix!
- Thread starter drdel
- Start date
- Status
SwingsitlikeHogan
Major Champion
And so both of our candidates for PM say that unless the backstop is removed completely from a deal then there is no deal - and so no need for any further extension as suggested by von de Leyen. Strikes me that in stating this both have effectively set a condition on a deal that they pretty much 100% know that the EU will not / cannot agree to - but that notwithstanding they can probably then claim that a No Deal situation and departure was due to EU intransigence. Ah well. No Deal here we come.
Last edited:
And..........
You could say the EU have set the (backstop) condition. Who is forcing who with what might be seen as an unacceptable condition?
SocketRocket
Ryder Cup Winner
All the EU have to say is "We wish to open a two year discussion with the UK after they leave the EU on a free trade agreement and the movement of people and goods in Ireland. Any free trade agreement will be conditional on the UK paying their outstanding monies to cover their outstanding and ongoing responsibilities. During this negotiating period the UK will remain members of the customs union"
Job done, everyone could sign up to this, other than those that have an agenda of keeping the UK in the EU.
SwingsitlikeHogan
Major Champion
But it is surely only a consequence of the UK leaving and May's Red Lines. It would only be unacceptable were there is no foreseeable solution to the border control and management issue - and we are continually being told by 'lead' Leavers, and other experts aplenty, that solutions actually exist now that are a combination of the technical and procedural - all that is required is a plan to scale these up and roll them out. Therefore even if the backstop has to be initiated it will have an absolutely defined and known end date as soon as that plan is shared with the EU - given the EU are not allowed to unreasonably withhold acceptance of a workable solution.
SocketRocket
Ryder Cup Winner
First of all "red lines." When are you ever, ever, ever going to admit that the EU has also set "red lines?" There's 2 sides to the intransigence but you only ever, ever, ever see one side.
Secondly, the EU produced, note EU produced, the AVCO(sp) report in December 2018 in which it said the EU already has the technology available for a seamless border, its conclusion being that it is the EU that is "unreasonably withholding acceptance of a workable solution." An EU report being scathing about the EU's lack of willingness to move on this issue, citing the dangers to jobs and the economy in the EU. The EU has its own project up and running NOW to have seamless borders throughout the EU by 2024. The Beeb did 2 very good pieces on the technology already being used in the EU. One was the border between the EU and Russia, and the other was a very comprehensive piece listing a number of borders, the main example being the comprehensive controls in place at the Norwegian border.
There is no need for the controversial backstop clause, especially as the implementation period would have run through to when the EU has set a target date of EU wide seamless borders. Without the backstop May's BRINO deal would, probably, have gone through. A deal that heavily favoured the EU. Now, No Deal and the threat to withhold the £39bn is back on the table. So why is the EU insisting on the backstop? Not even you are that naive you can't see that the EU is continually fudging in the hope that Brexit won't happen - too blinkered maybe but not too naive.
We now have a new EU President offering an extension. Bearing in mind that a new EU budget starts next year, there's a potential for another extension seeing the UK's financial commitment extending well beyond £39bn, and through to the end of 2025.
He’ll never admit the EU are at fault.
chrisd
Major Champion
As usual Hobbit - are you going to continually let facts get in the way of SILH's Brexit rants. This reasoned argument ploy of yours really must stop !
Hacker Khan
Yurt Dwelling, Yoghurt Knitter
Just beautiful
SocketRocket
Ryder Cup Winner
Very enlightening 🙄
Foxholer
Blackballed
Nice selfie!
Foxholer
Blackballed
IMO, it was May's inability to secure an end-date to the 'backstop' that scuppered her 'deal'! Whether it was ever likely that she, and the negotiating team, were ever going to be able to do so is now moot - but as Hobbit mentioned, there are plans tat should have allowed for some sort of timing/event to have been used.
And, of course, there STILL has to be a 'seamless' border created, at least between North and South, to ensure that the Good Friday Agreement isn't breached!
SwingsitlikeHogan
Major Champion
Meanwhile both Johnson and Hunt rule out removal of a time limit on the backstop and unilateral UK exit from the backstop as options...and even although the EU had ruled-out a time limited backstop and unilateral exit - there were noises off that there might be some flexibility by the EU in these two areas. Now they have been ruled out what is Johnson going to negotiate with the EU?
SwingsitlikeHogan
Major Champion
It is the UK that is leaving the EU - not the other way around - and the EU are protecting (as best they see it) the best interests of the EU27 and the GF Agreement. The EU are at fault for not bowing to the wishes of the UK? The EU did not set down red lines following the referendum. The EU's constraints were already there - there for all to see - and we knew about them all along. The UK then set out Red Lines that were immediately inconsistent with what was known about the EU's constraints. And so at that point many said we'd end up with No Deal.
Meanwhile Johnson removes two key negotiable aspects of the backstop - these aspects being what those opposed to the Backstop were most concerned about - that the back stop was not time-limited and that EU had to agree to any solution for the UK to be able to exit it.
Last edited:
Foxholer
Blackballed
That, presumably, pushes him (them) towards 'No Deal' - with border/backstop arrangements being negotiated subsequently.
Of course, participation in the Customs Union - without the restrictions of EU control over Trade Deals - would solve much of the issue. But I don't believe that's an acceptable 'deal' from EU's pov!
SocketRocket
Ryder Cup Winner
You were one of them, will let you decide which one.
Foxholer
Blackballed
To me, BOTH are 'at fault' because they couldn't reach an (acceptable) agreement!
And now - just like a divorce - it's not an issue about 'fault', but how to achieve the 'divorce'!
I don't believe an extension is the correct approach - except in the (frankly unlikely) situation where both parties agree that a 'deal' is imminent, but needs a short time to be finalised.
Foxholer
Blackballed
SocketRocket
Ryder Cup Winner
Seems like you got it right 😀😀😀
- Status
