Brexit - or Article 50: the Phoenix!

[Foxholer]

I think the core issue is not about the current positions of the UK or the EU but more about what direction we and the EU wish/should to travel.

The EU has become dominated by Germany and France who side with Juncker's vision. As Cameron found, like most UK PMs before him, the UK has never succeeded in getting the EU to be a cohesive group of trading partners. Political centralisation will not help the EU as their members are too different sociologically and economically. This federal tenet upon which the EU progresses and the constraints of the ECB has and will hog tie the individual monetary policies of nations. If the UK remained I'd predict the autonomy of the BoE would become questioned as would our ability to form our own monetary policy for sterling outside the Euro.

The future of the UK tied to this political experiment would IMO be a disaster for the standard of living for UK citizens. The short-term of our political voting system's 4 year cycle is a distinct disadvantage to the long term planning we need at this time.

Some well reasoned points - and I agree with quite a bit of it, though disagree with quite a bit of it too!

However, it's all rather knocked by the error in the last paragraph that also rather destroys the point being put forward....UK Parliamentary election cycle is 5 years, not 4!

 

[Hobbit]

Disappointed to hear my MP - Jeremy Hunt Foreign Secretary - spout such utter rubbish in his speech to the conservative party conference - comparing the EU to Soviet Russia in it's Salzburg stance on the UK's proposals for the re-engagement deal. From my exchanges with Hunt it is evident to me that this is simply leadership challenge posturing that he does not actually believe, posturing directed at those who still believe that there is a good re-engagement deal to be had - and if there isn't one then it will be the EU's fault and the EU will suffer as much if not more than the UK - because that is the message that the Leave fraudsters and charlatans are now pushing.

No longer it seems are they saying that there is a good relationship to be had in the brave new Brexit world - but if we are worse off for up to 50yrs (see Jacob R-M) then that is fine as we are well shot of the nasty and intransigent EU - when in fact we knew exactly that we would end up where we are today if we laid down the red lines that May subsequently laid down. And so here we are - in a complete and utter mess with the government riven from top to bottom and side to side over what to do.

But there is nothing surprising here if you cared to look. And the Telegraph, Sun, mail etc have to rant, because they have nowhere else to go if they are not to have to admit that they were wrong. And likewise Johnson, Farage, Rees-Mogg, Cash, Bone, Fox, Davis, Leadsome, Duncan-Smith, Grayling and the rest of that bunch have to rant - as they see all their vacuous promises and complaints about the EU they have made to the electorate over the years and leading up to the referendum exposed as the utter nonsense and lies that they have always been.

Jeremy Hunt is very late to the party in comparing the EU to a type of Soviet Republic, and that comparison didn't come from the Tory party. I've looked for the article I read a few years back, written by a prominent political lecturer from Cambridge. The essence of the article was two fold, the centralisation of government with member states losing more and more power and Russia's fear of a large economic and military presence right on its borders. He wrote that although the EU may not appear to have a Stalin-esque style leader it does mirror the Soviet Republics both in the its centralisation and the fact that one or two states actually rule the other 26 by virtue of their voting bloc and economic power within the EU.

Russia, basically, turned back to the nasty style when it invaded the Crimea and supported the unrest in the Ukraine. Why did it do that? Ukraine signed a gas supply deal with the EU, which impacted quite heavily on Russia's own supply deal with the EU. From being a favoured market of the EU, Russia has faced many sanctions that have impacted heavily.

Add to the fact Russia(Putin) fears an EU army, that will have greater seamless coordination than NATO, especially as Trump appears to be looking at pulling back from NATO, you get a good feel for Russia's historical fears from its western borders.

The article concluded that whilst the EU has many positives in terms of trade, its political aspirations are not good both internally and externally for its members. In effect, as many many people have said, as a trading bloc it has a huge amount to offer, but as a political exercise it is very, very dangerous.

A good read up of Russia's fears of the EU, especially an EU army, would open your eyes way beyond what Hunt has said.

 

[Dando]

Jeremy Hunt is very late to the party in comparing the EU to a type of Soviet Republic, and that comparison didn't come from the Tory party. I've looked for the article I read a few years back, written by a prominent political lecturer from Cambridge. The essence of the article was two fold, the centralisation of government with member states losing more and more power and Russia's fear of a large economic and military presence right on its borders. He wrote that although the EU may not appear to have a Stalin-esque style leader it does mirror the Soviet Republics both in the its centralisation and the fact that one or two states actually rule the other 26 by virtue of their voting bloc and economic power within the EU.

Russia, basically, turned back to the nasty style when it invaded the Crimea and supported the unrest in the Ukraine. Why did it do that? Ukraine signed a gas supply deal with the EU, which impacted quite heavily on Russia's own supply deal with the EU. From being a favoured market of the EU, Russia has faced many sanctions that have impacted heavily.

Add to the fact Russia(Putin) fears an EU army, that will have greater seamless coordination than NATO, especially as Trump appears to be looking at pulling back from NATO, you get a good feel for Russia's historical fears from its western borders.

The article concluded that whilst the EU has many positives in terms of trade, its political aspirations are not good both internally and externally for its members. In effect, as many many people have said, as a trading bloc it has a huge amount to offer, but as a political exercise it is very, very dangerous.

A good read up of Russia's fears of the EU, especially an EU army, would open your eyes way beyond what Hunt has said.

You do realise that your expert won’t be expert enough for SILH to believe a word he says!

 

[drdel]

Some well reasoned points - and I agree with quite a bit of it, though disagree with quite a bit of it too!

However, it's all rather knocked by the error in the last paragraph that also rather destroys the point being put forward....UK Parliamentary election cycle is 5 years, not 4!

You're right, my mistake. I might suggest the 5th year is mostly wasted by electioneering and I'm not sure the numerical error undermines the argument.

 

[Mudball]

Could not help sharing this.. when you spew nonsense about something without knowing who to blame .. (take it as face value) (audio needed)

https://twitter.com/x/status/1047044139077029889

 

[Foxholer]

Could not help sharing this.. when you spew nonsense about something without knowing who to blame .. (take it as face value) (audio needed)

:rofl: :rofl:

Love the highly appropriate text on the wall/post on right at vid end! Personalities work brilliantly too, so much so that I'd consider that it's quite possibly staged!

Good to see the some of the 'fear-oriented' b-s being countered somewhat aggressively though - albeit too late to be effective! Too much of the entire campaign was (understandably) fought using emotion rather than facts. And when 'facts' were used, they were far too often mis-used/mis-represented - by both sides. The 350million/week by Leave and Treasury estimates by Remain (which back-fired badly imo) were examples.

 

[woody69]

A couple of questions for you SILH.........

Why should the UK have to accept freedom of movement and the jurisdiction of the EU court to get a decent trade deal?

Did Canada and Japan have to accept free movement of people to get their trade deals?

Of course there is a good deal to be had, the question is how far the EU is prepared to go to punish the UK for daring to leave. I travel and work throughout Europe and from recent trips to Germany it seems as though major companies out there are getting more and more exasperated with the stance that Barnier is taking. They are demanding (not asking or suggesting) that a trade deal is done as they don't want their products to become prohibitively expensive if there is no deal. Add 20% to the cost of German cars for example and all of a sudden their competitors products start looking a lot more attractive.

As an aside, I noticed that when the EU were making encouraging noises about the government's Chequers plan you went missing from this thread for several days. Now it's not looking quite so good you return to post your usual negative and one sided drivel.

Japan and Canada didn't have to accept free movement of people because they are not within the single market. Their trade deal is no where near as good. As a member of the single market, we have tariff-free trade with the EU, and there is free movement of goods, services, people and capital between the UK and rest of the EU. The Norway and Canada options have been broadly framed as a choice between having a high level of access to EU markets and a high degree of EU regulation (Norway), or a lower level of access and regulation (Canada).

So, no the EU are not 'punishing' the UK for leaving,. It's as simple that as we will no longer be part of the club we won't be entitled to all the benefits.

 

[User62651]

If Raab and May get a deal agreed in principle with EU within a month, when does that deal become a white paper to debate and vote on in parliament? How long would it take to get an actual parliamentary vote done and dusted wrt 29th March. If she doesn't get parliamentary approval by 29th March what happens? Do we just ask for an extension?
Any May deal is going to be a compromise on Chequers it seems which is already seen as weak by the ERG Tories (50?) who will not back it, SNP (35) will not back any deal that means leaving single market and CU, DUP (10) may not back it if it weakens NIreland in UK position an iota, Labour seem to drift on the wind - not sure what they're doing, LibDems (12?) will be same position as SNP so wont back it in current form.

How on earth does May get this moving forward? May is determined but is she deluded as well?
Notice Sky pushing for leader debates, guaranteed May will not partake as she knows she can't handle questions under pressure.

Clear as mud!

 

[Hobbit]

If Raab and May get a deal agreed in principle with EU within a month, when does that deal become a white paper to debate and vote on in parliament? How long would it take to get an actual parliamentary vote done and dusted wrt 29th March. If she doesn't get parliamentary approval by 29th March what happens? Do we just ask for an extension?
Any May deal is going to be a compromise on Chequers it seems which is already seen as weak by the ERG Tories (50?) who will not back it, SNP (35) will not back any deal that means leaving single market and CU, DUP (10) may not back it if it weakens NIreland in UK position an iota, Labour seem to drift on the wind - not sure what they're doing, LibDems (12?) will be same position as SNP so wont back it in current form.

How on earth does May get this moving forward? May is determined but is she deluded as well?
Notice Sky pushing for leader debates, guaranteed May will not partake as she knows she can't handle questions under pressure.

Clear as mud!

As the EU have said they don't like the Chequers plan either but have repeated that a Canada style deal is on the table I wonder what the final deal will look like. A Canada style deal is favoured by Mogg's ERG, and Davies wrote to Tory MP's last week advocating a Canada style deal.

If the deal does, in large, look like a Canada style deal, that's the Tory rebels sorted. Most of the rest of the Tories will follow the Whip. If it satisfies the DUP, that's them in line. A few Brexit supporting Labour might vote as they did last time, and support it. It'll be close.

But if May continues to hang her hat on Chequers or nothing, she is deluded. And it will be the end of her. Maybe that whats she's angling for, back me or sack me.

 

[drdel]

A vote by MPs doesn't alter the signed Art 50 or the March 29th.

 

[SwingsitlikeHogan]

Well - four weeks on holiday (in Europe) and not paying much attention to what has gone on (other than when Germans, Swiss, Spanish, Dutch and Belgian nationals have been asking me what on earth we think we are doing) - and it seems that, with days to go, things are not really going to plan - assuming that is that the government actually had a plan for the negotiations post triggering Article 50.

Or maybe they are going to plan - and the apparent ignorance and denial in many (including astonishingly members of the government and many Tory MPs) of the impact of a hard Brexit or No Deal Brexit is all a bluff that the EU will buy...and we will get the deal that does minimal damage to the UK economy - because we won't be getting a deal that makes us immeasurably better off (as Leave promised). But to be fair maybe we will be better off when the unicorns come galloping over the hill in 5-10yrs time bringing us the deals with everyone around the world that we couldn't strike today and that will make us all better off - though if I believe JR-M I'll be in my 110s by the time that comes about. I am hopeful that a medical or technical solution comes along that will keep me going until then. But I do not hold my breath. Maybe by then a technical solution to the NU/EU border will also have been invented.

And yet clever people continue to claim that this is what was promised and that all who voted to leave knew all along that this would be how things would turn out

Oh dear.

 

[spongebob59]

With the Brexit negotiations in an absolute mess, the wonks at Open Europe have helpfully modelled the potential impact of a no deal scenario in a new report and found that the medium-term impact of no deal on the UK’s economic growth would be small and could largely be mitigated by unilateral action. Their modelling finds a drag on growth of only 0.17% per annum up to 2030, which could be reduced to a mere 0.04% p.a. if the UK adopted unilateral trade liberalisation measures. GDP will still be over 30% higher than today. Not the doomsday scenario Remainers like to talk about…

The bottom line is that the terms of Brexit are “very unlikely to be the determining factor for the UK economy’s medium-term and long-term growth prospects” – there are many other economic and political factors that are likely to have a far bigger impact over the next few years. Like the introduction of Venezuelan-style socialism…
If the UK wants no deal to be a credible negotiating position it needs a plan to turbocharge the economy, not simply to talk about averting catastrophe. That is what the EU really fears…

 

[SwingsitlikeHogan]

Just two examples (and they are too numerous) - from yesterday - in the same interview - Andrew Bridgen MP on UK citizens entitlement to an Irish passport and cross-border workers...for a Remain voter this sort of ignorance is just not funny any more.

https://www.theneweuropean.co.uk/to...his-ignorance-over-ireland-on-5live-1-5736665

https://www.theneweuropean.co.uk/to...-interview-with-rte-audrey-carville-1-5700147

Meanwhile the FS Jeremy Hunt has been telling his Eastern European counterparts that a Brexit deal is essential for maintaining global security. So what happened to No Deal is better than a bad deal?

 

[SwingsitlikeHogan]

With the Brexit negotiations in an absolute mess, the wonks at Open Europe have helpfully modelled the potential impact of a no deal scenario in a new report and found that the medium-term impact of no deal on the UK’s economic growth would be small and could largely be mitigated by unilateral action. Their modelling finds a drag on growth of only 0.17% per annum up to 2030, which could be reduced to a mere 0.04% p.a. if the UK adopted unilateral trade liberalisation measures. GDP will still be over 30% higher than today. Not the doomsday scenario Remainers like to talk about…

The bottom line is that the terms of Brexit are “very unlikely to be the determining factor for the UK economy’s medium-term and long-term growth prospects” – there are many other economic and political factors that are likely to have a far bigger impact over the next few years. Like the introduction of Venezuelan-style socialism…
If the UK wants no deal to be a credible negotiating position it needs a plan to turbocharge the economy, not simply to talk about averting catastrophe. That is what the EU really fears…

If we accept what this modelling finds - though why this modelling should be accepted when alternative modelling is dismissed and rejected by Leave voters I am not so sure - what are these trade liberalisation measures referred to?

 

[Dando]

Well - four weeks on holiday (in Europe) and not paying much attention to what has gone on (other than when Germans, Swiss, Spanish, Dutch and Belgian nationals have been asking me what on earth we think we are doing) - and it seems that, with days to go, things are not really going to plan - assuming that is that the government actually had a plan for the negotiations post triggering Article 50.

Or maybe they are going to plan - and the apparent ignorance and denial in many (including astonishingly members of the government and many Tory MPs) of the impact of a hard Brexit or No Deal Brexit is all a bluff that the EU will buy...and we will get the deal that does minimal damage to the UK economy - because we won't be getting a deal that makes us immeasurably better off (as Leave promised). But to be fair maybe we will be better off when the unicorns come galloping over the hill in 5-10yrs time bringing us the deals with everyone around the world that we couldn't strike today and that will make us all better off - though if I believe JR-M I'll be in my 110s by the time that comes about. I am hopeful that a medical or technical solution comes along that will keep me going until then. But I do not hold my breath. Maybe by then a technical solution to the NU/EU border will also have been invented.

And yet clever people continue to claim that this is what was promised and that all who voted to leave knew all along that this would be how things would turn out

Oh dear.

And it was a lovely 4 weeks for us all!

I was recently on holiday in Europe and not one person asked me anything about brexit!!!

 

[Deleted member 1418]

Well - four weeks on holiday (in Europe) and not paying much attention to what has gone on (other than when Germans, Swiss, Spanish, Dutch and Belgian nationals have been asking me what on earth we think we are doing) .

True - I'd definitely be asking why on earth you're going on holiday to Holland or Belgium!! Long weekend maybe to Amsterdam or Bruges, but nowhere else in either of those 2 countries as they're pretty bland and boring! There's a reason most European conflicts have been fought in Belgium - saves ruining a lot of lovely, picturesque places!!

But being serious now, what about the people you encountered who a) don't actually care about Brexit; or b) actually jealous that we are leaving (because there are a fair few of those I can tell you from my own experience of travelling to Europe for work since the referendum)?

 

[SwingsitlikeHogan]

And it was a lovely 4 weeks for us all!

I was recently on holiday in Europe and not one person asked me anything about brexit!!!

They were probably too embarrassed to speak with you abot it, no such hesitation by them with me.

 

[SwingsitlikeHogan]

True - I'd definitely be asking why on earth you're going on holiday to Holland or Belgium!! Long weekend maybe to Amsterdam or Bruges, but nowhere else in either of those 2 countries as they're pretty bland and boring! There's a reason most European conflicts have been fought in Belgium - saves ruining a lot of lovely, picturesque places!!

But being serious now, what about the people you encountered who a) don't actually care about Brexit; or b) actually jealous that we are leaving (because there are a fair few of those I can tell you from my own experience of travelling to Europe for work since the referendum)?

Who said I was on holiday in Belgium and Holland? I was in Scotland and Spain and spoke to tourists of many nationalities as well as locals.

Nobody in Spain I spoke with thought what we were doing was to our advantage...though I did have a bit of a debate with the Brexit-voting husband of one of my cousins. His main worry are unrealistic expectations many leave voters have in respect of wages and immigration.

Anyway sounds like the EU/NI border issue remains a critical stumbling block. Though just on that - if sorting it - technologically or otherwise - will be so easy (as proclaimed by many Leave Leaders) and by implication implementable in relatively short timescales - what is the issue that these same people have with an open-ended timescale for getting it in place?

And meanwhile - implementing the M26 lorry park has started (without the government really telling anyone) - and in response JR-M tells LBC that - yes - there might be some delay and hold-up issues whilst things are sorted out with the EU. But of course he 'admits' this in his most JR-M insouciant way because for JR-M nothing about leaving the EU - even with No Deal - is that BIG a deal. Well maybe not for him immediately but he might feel differently as his feet are held to the fire.

 

[Dando]

They were probably too embarrassed to speak with you abot it, no such hesitation by them with me.

Why would they be embarrassed?

 

[Slime]

Why would they be embarrassed?

Because SILH said so!