Brexit negotiations

[Cobby]

Even the UK has created its own red lines on the subject, vowing never to return to a hard border. Now it just has the extremely difficult (probably impossible) task of satisfying the hard Brexit requirements without crossing those red lines.

A reminder to everyone that there is not and never has been a Requirement for a Hard Brexit .

In fact, technically speaking, no deal whatsoever would ground all UK-EU flights on the day we leave, amongst other crazy things, so we better hope they at least cobble together something, which I assume they will.

There are now unconfirmed reports of the government preparing to stockpile non-perishable foods and are requisitioning barges upon which they can mount generators around Northern Ireland.

It's almost literally doomsday prepping.

 

[Cobby]

A whopping 17.4 million people voted to leave the EU,

No they didn't. We can't know why everyone voted they way they did, but we can make deductions informed by the data we have. I did a long-form explanation of that earlier in the thread: post-2847303
I'd be interested to hear your thoughts on it.

and they understood that to mean we leave the club and all its rules, seizing back full control of our economy, our borders and our laws. They understood that because David Cameron, who was the Prime Minister who called the Referendum, repeatedly made this clear in the run-up to the vote.

Again you cannot know what "they" understood.

I don't believe that all or even most of the Leave voters are racist (some are, obviously), but it's a bit rich for you to argue "You don't know Leave voters are racist" and in the next breath claim to know that all 17.4million voted Leave wanted a full on, economically disastrous, hard brexit scenario.

Only for "knowledgeable" people to say afdterwards they voters don't know what they are doing and ignore them. OUT is OUT - not some wishy washy rubbish that YOU feel is better for us.

There is an absolute mountain of evidence and testimony of experience pointing at huge amounts of economic damage in the case of a No Deal scenario. This isn't what we "feel" is better, it's an evidence backed assertion that No Deal is the very worst outcome of all, and I'm sorry if you "feel" differently.

 

[Cobby]

The hard border risk in Ireland isn't just the EU trying to be difficult. Northern Ireland refuses to accept it, the Republic of Ireland refuses to accept it, and the UK has vowed it will never happen either. There's a good chance we'll have no choice but to stay in the customs union and single market for this reason alone.

Rubbish, more likely to let Ireland merge and offer those that can't stomach a home in the UK.

So the actual reasons that the actual parties involved have publicly made clear... you think those are "rubbish"?

 

[Cobby]

If you want Europe - go and live there.

Oh man, this guy's gonna be so cross when he finds out he lives in Europe lmao

 

[Mr D]

No they didn't. We can't know why everyone voted they way they did, but we can make deductions informed by the data we have. I did a long-form explanation of that earlier in the thread: post-2847303

No they didn't?

What did you vote on in the referendum? This is the question.

"Should the United Kingdom remain a member of the European Union or leave the European Union?"

As Clodbuster said, 17.4 million people voted to leave the EU. Even though you don't want to accept that, other people did vote on the question in front of them.

 

[Cobby]

No they didn't?

What did you vote on in the referendum? This is the question.

"Should the United Kingdom remain a member of the European Union or leave the European Union?"

As Clodbuster said, 17.4 million people voted to leave the EU. Even though you don't want to accept that, other people did vote on the question in front of them.

We've been over this. You and I *specifically*.

If you are unwilling to accept that this is a vague question covered in a variety of promises and there is absolutely no way to clearly define the outcome of that question, then you're simply trolling.

Move along.

 

[Mr D]

We've been over this. You and I *specifically*.

If you are unwilling to accept that this is a vague question covered in a variety of promises and there is absolutely no way to clearly define the outcome of that question, then you're simply trolling.

Move along.

Which words did you consider vague?

How are you not seeing the outcome of that question, the media was full of it for weeks and there were multiple campaign groups shouting out the outcome of that question.

If disagreeing with you is trolling then I'm proud to do it. The words pot, kettle and black may be hung in front of your mirror.

 

[Deleted member 59730]

Story from a French woman we met with an English husband.

"Did you send off your postal vote?"
"Yes, I voted for the nurses."

She didn't speak to him for over 2 weeks and was still furious with his stupidity months later.

NB. He did not say he voted to leave the EU so how can anyone say there were not many more like him?

Last Saturday I heard of someone who described his vote as, "Voting for the Commonwealth."

I have yet to meet anyone saying they wanted to make the UK poorer and less able to pay for public services like the NHS.

 

[Mr D]

I have yet to meet anyone saying they wanted to make the UK poorer and less able to pay for public services like the NHS.

Depending on who you talk to that result was obtainable by either vote.
Not the way they themselves voted of course, the other way.

 

[JEREMY HAWKE]

I have come to the conclusion now .!
If someone voted to leave and their whole world falls apart because of this and they lose everything . Well that's their problem and I hope they don't complain that they were conned . It is your job to find out the facts not just let Johnson convince you .

If you lose everything and that is what you voted for then that is your choice

I will just grind the rust of my old vans and send anything leased or rented back keep the cost to a minimum and we will keep going. That's my Brexit plan !

 

[Cobby]

Which words did you consider vague

Okay. For the what is undoubtedly not the last time, since you're so enamoured with simply quoting the question, let's do it again.

"Should the United Kingdom remain a member of the European Union?"

Where in that question does it say:

• ...we must leave the Single Market?
• ...we must leave the Customs Union?

Nice and straightforward, there's only one answer, let's see if you can give it.

 

[Mr D]

Okay. For the what is undoubtedly not the last time, since you're so enamoured with simply quoting the question, let's do it again.

"Should the United Kingdom remain a member of the European Union?"

Where in that question does it say:

• ...we must leave the Single Market?
• ...we must leave the Customs Union?

Nice and straightforward, there's only one answer, let's see if you can give it.

Lets go back to the statement you made.

Clodbuster: A whopping 17.4 million people voted to leave the EU,
Cobby: No they didn't.

So based on the question raised and other people's ability to read the question (not your ability obviously) did they or did they not vote to leave the European Union based on the question

"Should the United Kingdom remain a member of the European Union or leave the European Union?"

You can try messing about with what we should or should not be part of as much as you want, it isn't the argument you were making.

You claimed that people didn't vote to leave the EU with that number. Provide the correct number or accept that indeed that number did vote to leave the EU.

 

[Cobby]

Lets go back to the statement you made.

Clodbuster: A whopping 17.4 million people voted to leave the EU,
Cobby: No they didn't.

So based on the question raised and other people's ability to read the question (not your ability obviously) did they or did they not vote to leave the European Union based on the question

"Should the United Kingdom remain a member of the European Union or leave the European Union?"

You can try messing about with what we should or should not be part of as much as you want, it isn't the argument you were making.

You claimed that people didn't vote to leave the EU with that number. Provide the correct number or accept that indeed that number did vote to leave the EU.

Ah, I see the issue here. I didn't notice that I'd trimmed the rest of his sentence where he spoke about everyone knowing that the question meant leaving everything.

And you're right, the answer I gave to that little snippet that I quoted makes absolutely no sense! *gasp* If only there were some incredibly obvious context that was easily available and would be inferred by anyone arguing in good faith.


Anyway...let's go back to this question that you are still avoiding:

"Should the United Kingdom remain a member of the European Union?"

Where in that question does it say:

• ...we must leave the Single Market?
• ...we must leave the Customs Union?

Nice and straightforward, there's only one answer, let's see if you can give it. I believe in you Mr D. You can do it.

 

[Mr D]

So Cobby do we leave the EU as we voted on or do we not leave the EU?

Your understanding of the question you voted on appears to be somewhat different than the politicians and media. Have you informed them of your error?

 

[Cobby]

So Cobby do we leave the EU as we voted on or do we not leave the EU?

Your understanding of the question you voted on appears to be somewhat different than the politicians and media. Have you informed them of your error?

We can go back over that if you like, but before you throw up any more strawman arguments let's deal with the issue at hand. The issue being your insistence upon the absolutism of the question.

"Should the United Kingdom remain a member of the European Union?"

Where in that question does it say:

• ...we must leave the Single Market?
• ...we must leave the Customs Union?

I believe in you Mr D. You can answer it.

 

[Gecko001]

Where in that question does it say:

• ...we must leave the Single Market?
• ...we must leave the Customs Union?

.

What is the EU? If it is anything at all, it is a group of nations coming together to form a trade bloc. The Single Market and Customs Union are so fundamental to the way that this trade bloc works, without them there would in fact be no trading bloc. The EU "club" going back to the days of the Common Market was founded on this Trading Bloc idea.

Without the Customs Union and Single Market, the EU would be just a collection of nations coming together to do not very much. They could not even claim to be a trading bloc I suggest.

All the thousands of harmonisation regulations of the EU are there because of the trading bloc aspect of the EU. The four freedoms of movement of goods, services, capital and people are there primarily so that the EU can be an effective trading bloc.

So if the question in the referendum meant only leaving aspects of the EU which did not involve the Customs Union and Single Market then it would, in effect, be a referendum on seeking EU Treaty adjustment.

 

[Newchodge]

What is the EU? If it is anything at all, it is a group of nations coming together to form a trade bloc. The Single Market and Customs Union are so fundamental to the way that this trade bloc works, without them there would in fact be no trading bloc. The EU "club" going back to the days of the Common Market was founded on this Trading Bloc idea.

Yes, but non-EU members can be members of the Customs Union and the Single Market, so membership of the EU is not a requirement for staying in the other 2. Gove and Fox at least found the concept of our leaving the Single Market after leaving the EU absolutely ridiculous and inissited, prior to the referendum that it would be in no-one's interests to do that. There was lengthy discussion of the Norway model.

So no, you cannot be sure that people who voted to leave the EU believed that they would also leave the other parts.

 

[Gecko001]

Yes, but non-EU members can be members of the Customs Union and the Single Market, so membership of the EU is not a requirement for staying in the other 2. Gove and Fox at least found the concept of our leaving the Single Market after leaving the EU absolutely ridiculous and inissited, prior to the referendum that it would be in no-one's interests to do that. There was lengthy discussion of the Norway model.

So no, you cannot be sure that people who voted to leave the EU believed that they would also leave the other parts.

No you cannot be sure, but what you are saying is that some leave voters did think that they would end up with a sort of Norway model where we would still pay into the EU and effectively remain in the part of the EU that functions as a trade block.

 

[Newchodge]

No you cannot be sure, but what you are saying is that some leave voters did think that they would end up with a sort of Norway model where we would still pay into the EU and effectively remain in the part of the EU that is a trade block.

Yes, I believe a number thought we would end up with a Norway style deal. Which was a particularly pointless basis to vote - we end up with the regulations, the cost, the immigration and no say in any of it. In other words we would be worse off than if we stayed in, which is the problem that May has now and which is why Greening's proporal of a referendum now may have legs.

 

[Gecko001]

Yes, I believe a number thought we would end up with a Norway style deal. Which was a particularly pointless basis to vote - we end up with the regulations, the cost, the immigration and no say in any of it. In other words we would be worse off than if we stayed in, which is the problem that May has now and which is why Greening's proporal of a referendum now may have legs.

I think the debate is moot, for the moment, anyway. The EU will not agree to us remaining in parts of the Custom's Union or Singles Market without payments into the EU or extracting some other major concessions. Even if the EU make some positive comments on last week's White Paper and repeat their complaints about running out of time, it is in the EU's interest to not agree with anything much right up to the last minute.

 

[alan1302]

Yes, I believe a number thought we would end up with a Norway style deal. Which was a particularly pointless basis to vote - we end up with the regulations, the cost, the immigration and no say in any of it. In other words we would be worse off than if we stayed in, which is the problem that May has now and which is why Greening's proporal of a referendum now may have legs.

If it's worse then why does it work for Norway?

 

[Newchodge]

If it's worse then why does it work for Norway?

I don't think Norway was ever a member, which ay make a difference, but you would have to ask the Norwegians that.

 

[alan1302]

I'm asking you as you said it was worse. If you don't know if it's worse then why say?

Think this highlights a problem with a referendum on such a big issue - lots of people have their opinions but it is often not based on knowing the facts.

 

[Newchodge]

I know that the Norway system is worse than what we have now. Norway has to respect the 4 freedoms, as do we, Norway has to pay large amounts into the EU in return for its trading status, as do we. Norway has absolutely no say in the regulations that they have to abide by. We participate in the creation of those regulations and can veto any we disagree with. The Norway deal is, in that very important respect, worse than what we have now.

Which part of this do you disagree with?

 

[Mr D]

Yes, but non-EU members can be members of the Customs Union and the Single Market, so membership of the EU is not a requirement for staying in the other 2. Gove and Fox at least found the concept of our leaving the Single Market after leaving the EU absolutely ridiculous and inissited, prior to the referendum that it would be in no-one's interests to do that. There was lengthy discussion of the Norway model.

So no, you cannot be sure that people who voted to leave the EU believed that they would also leave the other parts.

Being part of the customs union and single market requires the other side to agree. And they have their own requirements to meet regarding that.
Payment from the UK, freedom of movement etc. While not having a seat at the table deciding matters.

Whereas UK appears to want cake and eat it - free trade without freedom of movement. No payment from us to EU except membership of minor things.
While not having a seat at the table deciding matters.

For the UK over the years immigration has been a big issue. We already control non-EU immigration and that was apparently high - so quite what we could do to immigration overall if the EU citizens were in the same column of people entering the UK I have no idea.

 

[alan1302]

I know that the Norway system is worse than what we have now. Norway has to respect the 4 freedoms, as do we, Norway has to pay large amounts into the EU in return for its trading status, as do we. Norway has absolutely no say in the regulations that they have to abide by. We participate in the creation of those regulations and can veto any we disagree with. The Norway deal is, in that very important respect, worse than what we have now.

Which part of this do you disagree with?

In your first post you said it was worse. I asked you in what it was was worse and you said I'd have to ask the Norwegians.

You are now saying you know it is worse.

Why could you not just have put that the first time?

 

[Newchodge]

In your first post you said it was worse. I asked you in what it was was worse and you said I'd have to ask the Norwegians.

You are now saying you know it is worse.

Why could you not just have put that the first time?

Please read what you wrote and stop trying to re-write what everyone can see.

You asked why it worked for Norway. I haven't the faintest idea why it works for Norway, that is what you need to ask the Norwegians about. I have always been absolutely clear (including in discussions prior to the referendum) why it is owrse than what we currently have.

 

[Deleted member 59730]

Okay. For the what is undoubtedly not the last time, since you're so enamoured with simply quoting the question, let's do it again.

"Should the United Kingdom remain a member of the European Union?"

Where in that question does it say:

• ...we must leave the Single Market?
• ...we must leave the Customs Union?

Nice and straightforward, there's only one answer, let's see if you can give it.

I'm still waiting for Mr D to prove he is not trolling by answering Cobby's question.....

 

[Mr D]

I'm still waiting for Mr D to prove he is not trolling by answering Cobby's question.....

Which question was that? I already told him about trolling.
More than once.

 

[Cobby]

What is the EU? If it is anything at all, it is a group of nations coming together to form a trade bloc. The Single Market and Customs Union are so fundamental to the way that this trade bloc works, without them there would in fact be no trading bloc. The EU "club" going back to the days of the Common Market was founded on this Trading Bloc idea.

Without the Customs Union and Single Market, the EU would be just a collection of nations coming together to do not very much. They could not even claim to be a trading bloc I suggest.

All the thousands of harmonisation regulations of the EU are there because of the trading bloc aspect of the EU. The four freedoms of movement of goods, services, capital and people are there primarily so that the EU can be an effective trading bloc.

So if the question in the referendum meant only leaving aspects of the EU which did not involve the Customs Union and Single Market then it would, in effect, be a referendum on seeking EU Treaty adjustment.

A country can be a member of the SM and CU but not a member of the EU.

Which brings us back to @Mr D.

Which question was that? I already told him about trolling.
More than once.

Look, we want to believe you're arguing in good faith and not just for contrary reactions. All you have to do is answer that very straightforward question about the EU Referendum ballot that you keep referring to as a basis for all your arguments.

"Should the United Kingdom remain a member of the European Union?"

Where in that question does it say:

• ...we must leave the Single Market?
• ...we must leave the Customs Union?

Go on lad, you can do it. All you have to type is, "It doesn't."

 

[Cobby]

I'm asking you as you said it was worse. If you don't know if it's worse then why say?

Think this highlights a problem with a referendum on such a big issue - lots of people have their opinions but it is often not based on knowing the facts.

Here is the Norwegian Prime Minister Erna Solberg saying it's worse.
https://ind.pn/2NoD5vd

Interestingly, here's the Daily Express backing that up, pointing out Erna Solberg's turn of phrase that "Aside from being a member of the EU, the EEA is the best deal".
https://bit.ly/2JuwNIe

 

[The Byre]

The range of options are -

and that gives us the range of possibilities -

Those two diagrams are from Prof. Simon Hix of the LSE.

At first sight 'Canada' seems the most likely outcome, except that both sides insist that there must be no boarder between N and S Ireland and no boarder could possibly be tolerated between NI and the rest of the UK.

The EU doesn’t really want No Deal but could possibly work with any other option if Northern Ireland remains in the customs union and single market with the Republic of Ireland. The UK won’t agree with that, as it would mean a boarder between NI and the rest of the UK. Therefore No Deal seems the most likely to happen by default despite both sides finding it the least desirable outcome.

So even 'Canada' is out - making No Deal the most likely outcome.

However, a sudden departure from the EU with no provisions made for power, air traffic, services, security and one thousand other things would plunge the UK into economic chaos and a downward spiral to becoming a Third World country. Neither side will want that.

A future government will be forced to ask for an extension - and possibly more than one and almost inevitably, with so much time having passed since the Brexit referendum, a new referendum will be sought in 2024 or 5 and this whole asinine discussion can begin all over again!

 

[Mr D]

An extension would require agreement of the other members of the EU. We've squandered over 2 years what would anyone expect us to do in another 12 months?

Another option is scrap the article 50, so not leaving - and start again. Politically dangerous or political lifeline.

I have seen once again yesterday calls for a 2nd referendum. Is there time for that?
Say in mid-September the government agree to a 2nd referendum, timescale would be very tight - and at least one suggestion has come from electoral commission that referendums should be 6 months after being agreed by parliament.
A referendum days or weeks after we have left having slammed the door probably won't be worth anything.

 

[The Byre]

An extension would require agreement of the other members of the EU. We've squandered over 2 years what would anyone expect us to do in another 12 months?

The rest-27 are unanimous in their attitude to Brexit - they really don't care! Kicking Brexit into the long grass would suit both sides.

The Great Unknown is of course what happens within the Tory Party. One day, this whole issue will explode and really anything could happen.

 

[Cobby]

May accepting far-right Brexiteers' amendments to the Customs bill effectively leave the UK's proposal dead in the water as it's basically what the EU has already rejected.

This will mean there is no Withdrawal Agreement and the "No Deal" cliff edge is the default solution.

Furthermore, May's immediate acquiescence to the far-right of her party shows that she hasn't the authority to make offers or concessions that might be necessary in a negotiation.

Brexit is unachievable without ruining the country.

 

[Newchodge]

Brexit is unachievable without ruining the country.

But, then, it always was. Any agreement we can reach will be worse than what we already have. That should be obvious to anyone who gives the position any thought. The EU will not agree to anything that would mean being an ex-member of the EU is better than being a member. Because that would destroy the EU. I don't understand why so many people seem incapable of understanding that.

So the only real options are stay in or leave with no deal.

No deal requires, under WTO rules, a hard border between the UK and any other trading country/bloc. So hard border in Ireland and in Gibraltar and at all our ports and airports. It means customs checks at all of those hard borders, seriously damaging the efficient movement of goods. It means a completely uncertain position for all Brits who live and work in Europe or who want to study there. It means no collaboration on any EU projects. It may be better than what we have now, but I personally think it will be absolutely catastrophic.

 

[Mr D]

But, then, it always was. Any agreement we can reach will be worse than what we already have. That should be obvious to anyone who gives the position any thought. The EU will not agree to anything that would mean being an ex-member of the EU is better than being a member. Because that would destroy the EU. I don't understand why so many people seem incapable of understanding that.

So the only real options are stay in or leave with no deal.

No deal requires, under WTO rules, a hard border between the UK and any other trading country/bloc. So hard border in Ireland and in Gibraltar and at all our ports and airports. It means customs checks at all of those hard borders, seriously damaging the efficient movement of goods. It means a completely uncertain position for all Brits who live and work in Europe or who want to study there. It means no collaboration on any EU projects. It may be better than what we have now, but I personally think it will be absolutely catastrophic.

The fact that any agreement reached will be worse than what we already have may not have mattered to some or all the voters who voted leave.
They may have had other reasons that counted more with them. Those reasons may have been idealistic, nonsense or influenced by others but still it was the decision of the voters.

In just over 8 months will we have any planes flying to the EU or beyond the EU with no deal?

 

[Mr D]

The rest-27 are unanimous in their attitude to Brexit - they really don't care! Kicking Brexit into the long grass would suit both sides.

The Great Unknown is of course what happens within the Tory Party. One day, this whole issue will explode and really anything could happen.

No chance for a country annoyed with us or wanting concessions from us saying no?
Spain with Gibraltar? France with immigration?

 

[Cobby]

But, then, it always was. Any agreement we can reach will be worse than what we already have.

Given a decade of serious leadership and the right legal framework, it was, according to experts doable. it would of course still leave the UK worse off but would have been possible in a way that the current government never had a hope of achieving.

 

[Cobby]

No chance for a country annoyed with us or wanting concessions from us saying no?
Spain with Gibraltar? France with immigration?

Such is the democratic power of the EU.

Now, we're still waiting for you to answer that question.