Brexit negotiations

[Scott-Copywriter]

We may as well start a new thread to see us through the next year and half (or beyond) of Brexit negotiations.

We start day one with a capitulation. No parallel talks.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...rees-caves-in-before-trade-deal-a7798076.html

Good start. But hey, as Dave said himself, "It’s not when it starts but how it finishes that matters."

 

[Clinton]

There's one thing we can be sure of, newspapers like the Guardian and the Independent will try and spin every bit of news as a defeat for the UK. They are adamant that we shouldn't be leaving the EU and haven't gotten it through their thick heads that the Referendum is over. Especially the Guardian.

So they spin, spin, spin in the vain hope that the country is finally going to realise their "mistake" and choose to Remain. The Guardian's take today is that the UK has "caved in".

The Telegraph's take on the first day's talks is that both sides have ruled out a soft Brexit. There is normal coverage in several other papers including here at the Bild whose main point seems to be that a fair deal is possible.

But the Independent's angle, of course, is that we're losing already!

Ditch the i and the Guardian, they are raving lunatics when it comes to EU coverage and are guaranteed to make you depressed even if there is some fantastic good news in the negotiations and Britain wins the most unexpected concessions - they'll find some way to present that as a big win for the EU and a big loss for the UK.

 

[Mr D]

The media want you to pay attention so they tell a story. They cater to their customers and hope to attract new ones.

I have been in company negotiations multiple times, the only thing, repeat the ONLY THING that matters is the agreement made and signed. Everything else said, inferred, put forwards, withdrawn, altered or given away is not the end result.
Is international diplomacy any different? My limited reading of historical diplomacy does not suggest it is.

If we left it up to the media we get everything we want while at the same time give away everything we stand for and accept a subservient role in world affairs.

 

[KM-Tiger]

The good news is that the process has (at last!) begun.

I suspect it will be weeks before there will be anything substantive to discuss.

 

[quikshop]

There's one thing we can be sure of, newspapers like the Guardian and the Independent will try and spin every bit of news as a defeat for the UK. They are adamant that we shouldn't be leaving the EU and haven't gotten it through their thick heads that the Referendum is over. Especially the Guardian.

I couldn't agree more Clinton, I even made this very point on the Guardian website in response to an article describing the UKs humiliation on day one. Its such a shame, the Guardian is blessed with some great journalists but their anti-UK bias is hard to read.

The Independents fall from grace was complete years ago. It was for the first few years of launch a very good and genuinely neutral rag, its website-only these days full of anti-UK and hard left opinion writing based on speculation... I class it in the same basket as The Express.

Interestingly CNN has started re-publishing Independent articles which is a reflection of how far left that outlet has become. Probably a reaction to how far right Fox News is.

 

[Deleted member 59730]

even if there is some fantastic good news in the negotiations and Britain wins the most unexpected concessions - they'll find some way to present that as a big win for the EU and a big loss for the UK.

Even if there is fantastic news with amazing concessions leaving the EU will always be the biggest mistake that a UK government has inflicted on its people. Reading a different set of lies from your chosen media will not alter that.

 

[quikshop]

Even if there is fantastic news with amazing concessions leaving the EU will always be the biggest mistake that a UK government has inflicted on its people. Reading a different set of lies from your chosen media will not alter that.

The UK population decided, not the Government

Democracy has always been an anathema to socialists and hard left liberals everywhere, you only have to look at Venezuela for your leftist paradise. It is the voice of the people, the highest vote since Thatcher for a Tory Government despite all the pain it's inflicting across society, tells you everything you need to know about what the people thing of the EU and its communist routes.

 

[Gecko001]

The EU 27 member states will be driving this process. It is their club we are leaving it. When our politicians accept this maybe there will be a good outcome the UK. I wonder when the penny will drop.

 

[Deleted member 59730]

The UK population decided, not the Government

The Tory party decided to hold a referendum. The right wing of the Tory party drove a wedge through UK society to appease the right wing bigot Farage.

If the UK population were left to decide without the divisive rabble rousers we would never have even had a referendum to start with.

 

[Scott-Copywriter]

There's one thing we can be sure of, newspapers like the Guardian and the Independent will try and spin every bit of news as a defeat for the UK. They are adamant that we shouldn't be leaving the EU and haven't gotten it through their thick heads that the Referendum is over. Especially the Guardian.

In this case though, it's true.

I've read every newspaper and watched the press conference. The words, tonality and actions, even at this early stage, say a lot.

What happened to the "row of the summer"?

Davis flatly rejected the EU timetable. “That will be the row of the summer,” he told ITV.

“It’s wholly illogical, and we happen to think the wrong interpretation of the treaty,” Davis said. “How on earth do you resolve the border, the issue of the border with Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland, unless you know what our general borders policy is, what the customs agreement is, what the free trade agreement is, whether you need to charge tariffs at the border or not?”

Perhaps he's right. But the fact remains that a trade agreement will now be on the back burner until there is sufficient progress in other areas.

It's exactly what the EU wanted, and exactly what the Davis said he would have a huge row over.

Don't get me wrong here. I actually think it's the right approach. As Barnier said himself, the UK decided to leave the EU - not the other way around. It's entirely reasonable to expect the ball to be in the EU's court on many matters.

But it just shows, which I think many know already, that this aggressive rhetoric is a load of nonsense. How they are in front of the British press, and how they will be sat round the negotiating table, is going to be very different.

The pretence is embarrassing. And if certain media publications do attack the routine negotiation updates, it's going to be the Government's own fault. The only reason there is something to ridicule is because Davis set the stage for it with his macho remarks.

 

[Paul Norman]

Day one is complete.

The process of actually exiting has begun. At least it is reported to have begun.

And the gist of it is that already we have agreed to, potentially, pay the exit penalties in principle, although an amount has yet to be finally calculated.

Border issues have been conceded as a negotiating stance.

Trade talks have not yet begun.

Of course, we only have sketchy headlines. I wonder if this is the strong, dominant, we hold the cards negotiation exit voters were expecting. To me it feels is starting to sound a little like a capitulation.

 

[Kat Haylock]

I've merged the two new Brexit threads and will now leave you all to it for the next eighteen months!

 

[STDFR33]

After each Brexit meeting, each party will come out and proclaim a win.


It has been just one day. There are no winners or losers at this stage.


Until we see the finer details of when certain issues are in the penultimate stages of negotiation, then we will no how the negotiations are going for us. We will finally know when those issues are rubber stamped.


All we have at this stage is fluff.

 

[STDFR33]

I've merged the two new Brexit threads and will now leave you all to it for the next eighteen months!

Just one place to hear 'right wing bigots' and 'raving loony lefties'. This place will be a bloodbath within 5 pages ;-)

 

[The Byre]

Here are some sobering facts some of you may wish to cogitate over -

1. The referendum has advisory (i.e. political) status only. As I stated elsewhere, there is reason to believe that parliament has not (yet!) stated clearly that it wishes to leave the EU.

2. Paper-Island is diminishing rapidly. With Paper-Island, I mean Guardian, Mail, Times, etc. and I am including their various websites. Social media is reaching out to the young and the young are very naturally moving up through the ranks of the population as the old die off, or just forget who they are and why they came into this damn room in the first place.

3. As for @Clinton's report of articles in that great German institution 'Bild Zeitung', I cannot find a single German or French newspaper that has the Brexit talks anywhere in their news sections today. The notorious tabloid 'Bild' - the only 'British stories they are carrying, are the further reports of Grenfell Tower 'heroes' (pictures of sexy female fire fighters) stories about the Mosque attack (pictures of sexy female Muslim girls) and stories about British binge-drinking in Majorca (video footage of naked English girls wandering the streets).

So if Theresa wants to get her message across to the German people via Bild Zeitung, she is going to have to get those mammary glands out. That, after all, is what Bild is there for! (The German people have a right to have a butcher's!)

So we must assume that the rest of Europe is so enthralled by the whole subject of Brexit, that they cannot even talk about it. Either that, or they really couldn't give a f**k!

 

[Cobby]

There's one thing we can be sure of, newspapers like the Guardian and the Independent will try and spin every bit of news as a defeat for the UK. They are adamant that we shouldn't be leaving the EU and haven't gotten it through their thick heads that the Referendum is over. Especially the Guardian.

The Telegraph's take on the first day's talks is that both sides have ruled out a soft Brexit. There is normal coverage in several other papers including here at the Bild whose main point seems to be that a fair deal is possible.

Ditch the i and the Guardian, they are raving lunatics when it comes to EU coverage and are guaranteed to make you depressed even if there is some fantastic good news in the negotiations and Britain wins the most unexpected concessions - they'll find some way to present that as a big win for the EU and a big loss for the UK.

Left of centre newspapers: "Raving lunatics".
Right of centre newspapers: "Normal coverage".

Hardly a convincing way to spread 'advice'.

 

[Cobby]

I couldn't agree more Clinton, I even made this very point on the Guardian website in response to an article describing the UKs humiliation on day one. Its such a shame, the Guardian is blessed with some great journalists but their anti-UK bias is hard to read.

What's hard to read is this Fall-In-Line-Or-You're-A-Traitor rhetoric. Enemies of the people. The UK is divided on Brexit, with recent polls showing a swing for Remain so even the ~3% margin is moot at this point. Half the country being against a course of action is not 'anti-UK' simply because the side supporting the government happen to disagree with it.

 

[Cobby]

The UK population decided, not the Government

If you're referring to last year's referendum, what you mean to say is "The UK population decided again, only this time differently." Given the current polling if we were to decide *again*, we'd change our minds *again*. Seems like it'd be sensible to expect a large majority in that decision if we, as a nation, wish to take such a divisive and damaging course of action...

Democracy has always been an anathema to socialists and hard left liberals everywhere, you only have to look at Venezuela for your leftist paradise. It is the voice of the people, the highest vote since Thatcher for a Tory Government despite all the pain it's inflicting across society, tells you everything you need to know about what the people thing of the EU and its communist routes.

Cool, in one paragraph you conflated liberalism, socialism, communism, and authoritarianism, and then applied it all to the EU, and you even smoothly glossed over the broken First-Past-The-Post system to imply that the country is far more in favour of the current Conservative government than they actually are.

You did at least drop a fact in there about voting numbers, so it's not all bad.

 

[quikshop]

The Tory party decided to hold a referendum. The right wing of the Tory party drove a wedge through UK society to appease the right wing bigot Farage.

If the UK population were left to decide without the divisive rabble rousers we would never have even had a referendum to start with.

Simplistic and selective. The Tory party committed to a referendum to head off the UKIP challenge, and that only came about because the fabric of British society has been changed at pace without any say by the populous, and they had started to express their discontent in the polls... you know, that pesky democracy thing that socialists so love to hate.

You conveniently forget that Labour was the first to promise a referendum then weaseled their way out of it by convincing the EU to change the word 'Constitution' to 'Treaty'.

I read on the other thread either you or Cobby described all wealthy people as sub-human; that kind of mindless bigotry is every bit as hateful as some of the less pleasant aspects of UKIP.

 

[Newchodge]

I read on the other thread either you or Cobby described all wealthy people as sub-human; that kind of mindless bigotry is every bit as hateful as some of the less pleasant aspects of UKIP.

That was Scott-copywriter claiming that I thought that. I agreed with him, but you need to read and try to understand the post.

 

[Paul Norman]

That was Scott-copywriter claiming that I thought that. I agreed with him, but you need to read and try to understand the post.

It would be worth study the post in some detail, because it contained some hard, uncomfortable truths.

 

[Paul Norman]

There is appearing, once again, some confusion.

I hope that people understand that the Labour party is not anti democracy - not even in the tiniest bit. It is more left wing that in recent years, and that may not be to the liking of people, which is fair enough. But to suggest that it is anti democratic would require some detailed justification.

Both parties (I am aware there are more than two) get accused of not being democratic. I find the accusation in both directions inaccurate.

 

[Newchodge]

I've copied it over so people don't have to search:

"I've thought about this and I think you are right. I do consider the super-wealthy to be sub-human. People who have thousands of times more wealth than they need, even allowing for owning a super yacht and homes in every continent, can look at people in desperate need and ignore them. Or even exploit them.

Common humanity dictates that we help each other. The super wealthy take advantage.

To give 3 examples, Super wealthy football celebrities who have evaded tax, Messi, Ronaldo and now, possibly Mourinho (who was a personal hero of mine). They have more money than they could possibly ever spend yet they evaded tax to give themselves more and give others less. Out of pure greed. I think that is sub-human."

 

[Deleted member 59730]

I'm not sure how to link to a specific post on Facebook but if you cut and paste this into Google you'll find a version. Well worth a read.

THE LAUGHING STOCK OF EUROPE
[Translation by Paula Kirby]
If it weren't so serious, the situation in Great Britain would almost be comical.

 

[Scott-Copywriter]

Is anyone else surprised at how little face-to-face negotiating there will actually be?

If I recall correctly, there will be one full week of talks per month.

I'm not sure if that includes the weekend (probably not), which would mean that there will be around 100 total days of face-to-face negotiations between Barnier and Davis.

Presumably there's a reason, but it doesn't seem like an efficient use of the time we have left.

 

[Newchodge]

Is anyone else surprised at how little face-to-face negotiating there will actually be?

If I recall correctly, there will be one full week of talks per month.

I'm not sure if that includes the weekend (probably not), which would mean that there will be around 100 total days of face-to-face negotiations between Barnier and Davis.

Presumably there's a reason, but it doesn't seem like an efficient use of the time we have left.

Perhaps it is because there is very little to negotiate about. Negotiation involves 2 sides with a starting position and the negotiation takes place to try to reach an agreed centre ground. May has already stated that her position (whatever that position may be, as neither she nor anyone else seems to know) will not change. What is there negotiate?

 

[Deleted member 59730]

I'm not sure if that includes the weekend (probably not), which would mean that there will be around 100 total days of face-to-face negotiations between Barnier and Davis.

Do you actually think that Barnier and Davis are going to do it all? There will be a 'technical' team on both sides of considerable size dealing with the minutae.

At the end of the negotiation a nameless civil servant will hand Davis his speech and that will be it. Davis himself is unlikely to have any input beyond appearing at press conferences.

 

[The Byre]

How they are in front of the British press, and how they will be sat round the negotiating table, is going to be very different.

For Davis and Co., these talks will decide their political futures and careers. For Michel Barnier and his crew, the outcome means very little personally. That alone means that the processes will be one-sided. You can't do a deal with someone who couldn't give a f**k.

But worse still, Michel Barnier has had a year to prepare for this. That is a year to workout every possible position and development. Davis (mis)spent that year, playing silly political games.

Michel Barnier has had an entire year to workout precise effects of every conceivable development. He has been talking to the executives and economists at all the major industries across Europe and they too have been working out what to do in every possible eventuality.

That is like two chess players, one can see two moves in advance, the other twelve.

Negotiation is only and totally about preparation. The UK has done no preparation.

As for that brilliant article from 'Bund' the translation is here

https://www.facebook.com/paula.kirby.7/posts/10155368350083480

and the original is here -

http://mobile2.derbund.ch/articles/59442e3cab5c3744ba000001

It pretty well sums up how Britain is hell-bent on descending into obscurity and possibly something even worse!

 

[Scott-Copywriter]

Do you actually think that Barnier and Davis are going to do it all? There will be a 'technical' team on both sides of considerable size dealing with the minutae.

Of course not. But considering that most people hold little hope of two years being enough, you would have thought that they would take more advantage of the time available.

The minutiae start with the major decisions. Even one particularly difficult point could drag on for many weeks.

Although I suppose it is just a starting point. I imagine that if the negotiations turn out more difficult than expected, they'll put the extra hours in.

 

[Paul Norman]

There is not - for the reasons above - much negotiation to do. The EU will set out its position and we will take it or leave it. We might get to make some very minor changes.

But it will get represented as us getting our way on everything.

We come at this, remember, from a position of immense weakness. Oh, I know we are not supposed to say that. I read only yesterday that Theresa May is in a position of strength that resembles that enjoyed by Thatcher.

But the opposite is true. Currently, the strong UK, emerging from an absolute 'hard' exit from Europe, is not one of the choices on the paper that David Davies has to tick.

 

[Scott-Copywriter]

There is not - for the reasons above - much negotiation to do. The EU will set out its position and we will take it or leave it. We might get to make some very minor changes.

There's lots to negotiate, in my view. But it's not always the case of one side having to lose while the other wins.

Some points are just extremely difficult to figure out. For example, the NI/ROI and Gibraltar/Spain borders. There is no perfect solution there, and both sides have fairly similar interests (unimpeded flow of EU and UK citizens while maintaining the security of a hard border).

The divorce bill will be another point of contention. It's clear that both sides are willing to compromise, but I suspect that a lot of weeks will be spent picking apart the numbers that make up the total.

We come at this, remember, from a position of immense weakness. Oh, I know we are not supposed to say that. I read only yesterday that Theresa May is in a position of strength that resembles that enjoyed by Thatcher.

But the opposite is true. Currently, the strong UK, emerging from an absolute 'hard' exit from Europe, is not one of the choices on the paper that David Davies has to tick.

I agree. I can see us buckling first on most issues. As Barnier said, we're leaving the EU, not the other way around. We would be wise to know our place.

 

[KM-Tiger]

Some points are just extremely difficult to figure out. For example, the NI/ROI and Gibraltar/Spain borders.

I would have thought the Irish border would relatively easy to deal with. It could remain open (I gather the DUP are in favour of that), but enhanced checks would be needed on flights/ferries out of NI so it does not become an easy backdoor into the rest of the UK.

 

[The Byre]

I would have thought the Irish border would relatively easy to deal with. It could remain open (I gather the DUP are in favour of that), but enhanced checks would be needed on flights/ferries out of NI so it does not become an easy backdoor into the rest of the UK.

That would be an absolute non-starter, for legal, as well as political reasons.

 

[Gecko001]

Brexit has caught the UK political and media establishment out. This establishment is so entrenched in left-right political thinking that they cannot get their heads around something that has really little, if anything to do with left-right thinking.

We are dealing with 27 countries. Some have right-wing governments, some have left-wing governments, some have centre governments and some have governments based around constitutional or other issues. As a group, do the 27 countries care about which government in the UK they are dealing with? Do you think they will change their position on anything depending on which UK government they have to negotiate with? Are they worried about getting X government rather than Y government to deal with? I doubt it.

 

[Scott-Copywriter]

I would have thought the Irish border would relatively easy to deal with. It could remain open (I gather the DUP are in favour of that), but enhanced checks would be needed on flights/ferries out of NI so it does not become an easy backdoor into the rest of the UK.

Northern Ireland can't just be the buffer zone of mainland UK, though. I suspect they will want the same privileges as the rest of the UK.

And don't forget the Good Friday Agreement. Laws need unionist and republican support, and both the ROI and UK Governments are supposed to remain completely impartial.

Remember, Northern Ireland voted to remain. A key part of the agreement is NI's right to self-determination, where constitutional status is decided by the people of Ireland alone with a majority NI verdict.

The question is, how on the earth does the UK remain impartial in all of this while an agreement is found that satisfies both the unionists and republicans? This EU referendum vote, which went against the will of the people of Northern Ireland, is in very dangerous territory as it is.

We are heading towards a situation where the very fabric of Irish relations will be changed against the will of the Irish people. And the cause? England and Wales.

It's a very, very messy situation.

PS: We can't forget the customs issue, either. Leaving the customs union without enforcing customs control at the EU/UK land border - figure that one out.

 

[Gecko001]

Northern Ireland can't just be the buffer zone of mainland UK, though. I suspect they will want the same privileges as the rest of the UK.

And don't forget the Good Friday Agreement. Laws need unionist and republican support, and both the ROI and UK Governments are supposed to remain completely impartial.

Remember, Northern Ireland voted to remain. A key part of the agreement is NI's right to self-determination, where constitutional status is decided by the people of Ireland alone with a majority NI verdict.

The question is, how on the earth does the UK remain impartial in all of this while an agreement is found that satisfies both the unionists and republicans? This EU referendum vote, which went against the will of the people of Northern Ireland, is in very dangerous territory as it is.

We are heading towards a situation where the very fabric of Irish relations will be changed against the will of the Irish people. And the cause? England and Wales.

It's a very, very messy situation.

PS: We can't forget the customs issue, either. Leaving the customs union without enforcing customs control at the border is largely incompatible.

The Republic of Ireland prime minister has expressed concerns but has not gone as far as to say that the UK government cannot remain impartial if the DUP has an arrangement with the Conservatives.

Sein Fein are making noises about impartiality, but the noises are only mutters because they have members of parliament in the Republic of Ireland's Parliament in Dublin and have come close to forming a coalition with the parties in the Republic recently and no doubt hope at some time in the future they will actually be form such a coalition. If that was to happen then then there would be similar calls of impartiality.

Also, many people are bringing up an impartiality issue with the Labour Party's sister party in Northern Ireland, the SDLP, in connection with their involvement in the Good Friday negotiations lead by Tony Blair.

 

[Scott-Copywriter]

The Republic of Ireland prime minister has expressed concerns but is not saying that the UK government cannot remain impartial if the DUP is forming an arrangement with the Conservatives. Sein Fein are making noises about impartiality, but they are not screaming about it because they have members of parliament in the Republic of Ireland's Parliament in Dublin and have come close to forming a coalition with the parties in the Republic recently and no doubt hope at some time in the future they will actually be form such a coalition. If that was to happen then that would drive a coach and horses through impartiality.

Also, many people are bringing up an impartiality issue with the Labour Party's sister party in Northern Ireland, the SDLP, involvement in the Good Friday negotiations lead by Tony Blair.

Sure. But it doesn't make this situation any easier.

It's early days. The level of disagreement hinges on the proposed solution to this problem.

If there's no border, with a seamless flow of trade, goods and people, the problem will never come close to being as serious as it could be.

But that goes against what the UK Government wants, which is to leave the EU, the customs union and the single market.

We must accept that, unless someone has a genius idea, there may be no solution. If it's impossible to unite both goals, it's impossible.

The situation in Ireland may well be the driving force which results in a soft Brexit for the UK.

 

[Gecko001]

The removal of customs between NI and RoI was as a result of the formation of the Single Market and customs were there to some degree up until 1993. They were totally independent from the military check points. The removal of military checkpoints was part of the Good Friday agreement 1998. , As far as I am aware there is nothing in the Good Friday Agreement on customs - I assume they were irrelevant when negotiating the Good Friday Agreement since they had been taken away due to the formation of the Single Market.

 

[KM-Tiger]

PS: We can't forget the customs issue, either. Leaving the customs union without enforcing customs control at the EU/UK land border - figure that one out.

Good point, but if our aim is a free trade agreement with the EU then that would not be an issue.

 

[Gecko001]

We must accept that, unless someone has a genius idea, there may be no solution. If it's impossible to unite both goals, it's impossible.

The situation in Ireland may well be the driving force which results in a soft Brexit for the UK.

A customs border should not be confused with military check points and watch towers. I have seen several reporters, who should know better, confusing them. When customs were in place there were queues of lorries at the border at times and on occasions a customs officer from the RoI side making spot checks on cars crossing the border. They were generally not considered of any political importance - just an inconvenience. The military check points, barbed wire and watch towers obviously were considered as of great political importance and also a symbol proclaiming to the world the problems that existed. But they had nothing to do with the customs border.

PS. My point is that a customs border, although undesirable for people both sides of the border, will not mean a return to barbed wire and military check points as many reporters, commentators etc. seem to think.