Brexit

Harry Ola wrote:Sounds like it is going really well. Who could have anticipated the EU would prefer a short term economic hit in order to decimate our economy and pick up the pieces, rather than just make a mockery of the whole EU and the four freedoms.

Hexx wrote:Davis getting effectively laughed off stage for telling the EU audience "don't put politics before prosperity"

Dear lord.

twitter.com/davidallengreen/status/931184592278704129

1.
Historians may one day say Brexit was won and lost in those three or so months between the referendum and May's October 2016 conference speech.
Everything after that has been an aftershock of the decisions made in that period.

2.
Before the October speech, there were no "red lines" and no absolutes.
There was only the referendum mandate that UK should leave the EU.
There were nothing more specific.

3.
In particular, the referendum question (and hence the mandate) was silent on:
- date of leaving
- method of leaving (Article 50 was not mentioned)
- whether UK would leave Single Market, Customs Union, Common Commercial Policy
- whether ECJ would lose jurisdiction

4.
(cont)
- whether UK would pay any amount to EU
- what would happen to EU citizens in EU, and UK citizens in EU
- whether UK left Euratom
- whether UK would have a Free Trade Agreement with EU
-whether UK went onto WTO terms

And so on.

5.
Not one of these issues were in the referendum question. There was no (express) mandate on any of these issues.
Between June and October 2016, all were still in play as issues yet to be determined.

6.
And then: the conference speech.
A red line for ECJ jurisdiction - as if from nowhere, as it had been hardly mentioned in the campaign or after the referendum. (See my post here on its genesis as a red line: https://t.co/KB3sgHHPv7 )

7.
The referendum result was converted into the formulation of control over laws, money and borders.
What was an ultimate objective of UK leaving the EU also became three more concrete aims.

8.
But the crucial point is that the intended primary audience for the speech: Brexit political supporters and the Brexit supporting press.
The impact of these demands on the actual exit negotiations was not so important.

9.
At the time there was tomfoolery from Brexit supporters about "not revealing our hand" and "no running commentary".
But in fact, UK not only revealed its hand but played it.

10.
This is because the necessary implication of the lines in the crowd pleasing Conference speech was that the UK would have to leave the Single Market, the Common Commercial Policy, and the Customs Union.

11.
The open admission by May in her January 2017 speech at Lancaster House that UK would leave the Single Market, the Common Commercial Policy and the Customs Union was a foregone conclusion.

12.
So the die was cast in substantive terms.
But in terms of process, the priority given to domestic consumption meant that UK was undermined in preparation.
The Rogers resignation aloe in January 2017 was significant here.

13.
By December 2016/January 2017, the EU had formulated a negotiating strategy which they have kept to since.
In contrast, the UK never had a negotiation strategy.
Improvisation and playing to the crowd.
Nothing more.

14.
The Article 50 notification was more of the same. Six pages of waffle and an implicit threat about security cooperation.
Euratom departure thrown in as well.
Sent prematurely, just to please political and press supporters.

15.
But the fatal error was that Article 50 commenced a hard legal(istic) process.
The Article 50 letter was not a press release but a formal legal instrument. It mattered.
Handle with care, keep out of the reach of children.

16.
The EU knew this. They always knew this. They had prepared for it. They knew all the pressure points.
By April, EU27 had unanimous guidelines. They were ready.

17.
And the UK?
No preparation.
No strategy.
Red lines for domestic consumption that strangled any bespoke possible options re single market and customs union.
No agreed post Brexit position.
Could not have been worse.

18.
And why had the UK ended up in this predicament?
Because of the decisions made in the lead-up to the October 2016 speech and what was said in the speech itself.
Everything since is a ripple.

19.
The UK now will leave the EU on 29 March 2019 by automatic operation of law.
(Unless something exceptional and unexpected happens.)
Deal or no deal.
Beyond UK parliament's direct control.

20.
And the UK faces the offer of a mere Canada-style Free Trade Agreement, with no special carve-outs.
Just because of May's red lines on the Single Market, the Common Commercial Policy, and the Customs Union.

1/

Firstly, even if somehow Angela Merkel were scared that the German economy could be crippled by, er, not being able to export freely to a smaller country like the UK, she cannot intervene to offer the UK a special deal. No one can.

2/

Let us repeat: the EU is the Single Market and the Single Market is the EU.

Let us also repeat: the Single Market is a market of *rules*. This is the fundamental point David Davis has still failed to grasp.

3/

For that reason, participation in the Single Market by any non-EU State is determined by which rules that State is willing to adopt.

And that the end of it.

(Norway adopts nearly all of them, for example; Moldova just a few.)

4/

David Davis therefore still hasn’t grasped that this negotiation is not “We give a bit, you give a bit”.

It is essentially “Here are the rules of the Single Market; tell us which ones you no longer wish to apply and that will determine your level of participation in it.”

5/

This really should be obvious. How otherwise could a 27/28-member bloc function if it did not have *rules*? And those rules cannot be amended other than with the support of the whole bloc.

6/

This is all to leave quite aside that David Davis vastly overstates the UK’s economic importance. Germany sells many multiples more cars in China and the US, for example. That is a basic matter of fact.

7/

UK really should have worked out by now, more than halfway between Referendum Day and Brexit Day, that this whole “They’ll bend to our will” stuff is a *myth*.

It can’t happen - and wouldn’t, even if it could.

8/

And for any UK Minister to go anywhere else and tell the locals not to put “politics before prosperity” is, right now, to set a new world record in gross hypocrisy.

For that is precisely and embarrassingly what the UK alone is doing with #Brexit.

9/

David Davis’ call for co-operation in the interests of mutual prosperity was met with an obvious first question from a German journalist.

“If that is what you want, why are you leaving?”

Quite.

Photek wrote:Looks like an absolute clown.

The Irish Prime Minister has set Theresa May a one-month deadline to explain how she will avoid a damaging hard border with Northern Ireland, or he will block Brexit trade talks.

Leo Varadkar dismissed Ms May’s claim that negotiations on the future land border are “almost there” as “wishful thinking”, at a breakfast meeting.

Instead, he told the UK prime minister that she must set out detailed proposals that can form part of the conclusions of the crunch December EU summit.

Without that reassurance, Ireland would block any attempt to move the negotiations onto future trade and a transitional period to cushion Brexit – the Holy Grail for the UK.

“They want us to take a leap in the dark and we are not prepared to do that,” one Irish source told The Independent.

“The British want to give the impression that we are all on the same page, that it is just a question of finding a form of words, but that is certainly not the case.

We need an explicit commitment, confidence about the impact on the island of Ireland, before the talks can progress to phase two.”

The stance, following talks between the two leaders at a summit in Sweden, is a stark reminder that the so-called “divorce bill” is not the only remaining obstacle to breaking the deadlock in the negotiations.

However, No 10 insisted there had been “constructive discussions on Brexit” and that both leaders anticipated “further progress” before the EU council.

“On Northern Ireland, the PM was clear that the Belfast agreement must be at the heart of our approach and that Northern Ireland’s unique circumstances demand specific solutions,” a spokesman said.

“The PM said it was important to protect progress made in Northern Ireland over recent years. Both leaders agreed to work together to find solutions which ensure there is no return to the borders of the past.”

British negotiators had, until recently, hoped that the vexed issue of the Irish border could be “parked” until trade talks begin, because they are so closely linked.

However, a leaked European Commission earlier this month showed that Dublin has Brussels staunch support in ensuring the controversy remains a priority.

It made clear that, in order to preserve the Good Friday Agreement, the Brexit divorce deal must respect “the integrity of the internal market and the customs union”, with Ireland remaining a member of both.

That meant the UK, to avoid a hard border with Northern Ireland, must also remain part of the customs union – something London has categorically ruled out, at least long term.

Previously, Brussels has dismissed the UK’s proposals to use untested new technology to police a light-touch Irish border as “magical thinking”.

Dublin is said to be demanding that the UK preserve about 100 EU regulations, many covering customs and agriculture, to ensure an open trade border with Northern Ireland.

But that would mean London either accepting the rules for the whole of Britain or granting special status to Northern Ireland, weakening the integrity of the UK – which ministers have rejected.

Hexx wrote:

The Irish Prime Minister has set Theresa May a one-month deadline to explain how she will avoid a damaging hard border with Northern Ireland, or he will block Brexit trade talks.

Leo Varadkar dismissed Ms May’s claim that negotiations on the future land border are “almost there” as “wishful thinking”, at a breakfast meeting.

Instead, he told the UK prime minister that she must set out detailed proposals that can form part of the conclusions of the crunch December EU summit.

Without that reassurance, Ireland would block any attempt to move the negotiations onto future trade and a transitional period to cushion Brexit – the Holy Grail for the UK.

“They want us to take a leap in the dark and we are not prepared to do that,” one Irish source told The Independent.

“The British want to give the impression that we are all on the same page, that it is just a question of finding a form of words, but that is certainly not the case.

We need an explicit commitment, confidence about the impact on the island of Ireland, before the talks can progress to phase two.”

The stance, following talks between the two leaders at a summit in Sweden, is a stark reminder that the so-called “divorce bill” is not the only remaining obstacle to breaking the deadlock in the negotiations.

However, No 10 insisted there had been “constructive discussions on Brexit” and that both leaders anticipated “further progress” before the EU council.

“On Northern Ireland, the PM was clear that the Belfast agreement must be at the heart of our approach and that Northern Ireland’s unique circumstances demand specific solutions,” a spokesman said.

“The PM said it was important to protect progress made in Northern Ireland over recent years. Both leaders agreed to work together to find solutions which ensure there is no return to the borders of the past.”

British negotiators had, until recently, hoped that the vexed issue of the Irish border could be “parked” until trade talks begin, because they are so closely linked.

However, a leaked European Commission earlier this month showed that Dublin has Brussels staunch support in ensuring the controversy remains a priority.

It made clear that, in order to preserve the Good Friday Agreement, the Brexit divorce deal must respect “the integrity of the internal market and the customs union”, with Ireland remaining a member of both.

That meant the UK, to avoid a hard border with Northern Ireland, must also remain part of the customs union – something London has categorically ruled out, at least long term.

Previously, Brussels has dismissed the UK’s proposals to use untested new technology to police a light-touch Irish border as “magical thinking”.

Dublin is said to be demanding that the UK preserve about 100 EU regulations, many covering customs and agriculture, to ensure an open trade border with Northern Ireland.

But that would mean London either accepting the rules for the whole of Britain or granting special status to Northern Ireland, weakening the integrity of the UK – which ministers have rejected.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/po ... 60046.html

Benzin wrote:Here come the drones!

However, a leaked European Commission earlier this month showed that Dublin has Brussels staunch support in ensuring the controversy remains a priority.

It made clear that, in order to preserve the Good Friday Agreement, the Brexit divorce deal must respect “the integrity of the internal market and the customs union”, with Ireland remaining a member of both.

That meant the UK, to avoid a hard border with Northern Ireland, must also remain part of the customs union – something London has categorically ruled out, at least long term.

Cuttooth wrote:The DUP can't support the government on anything full on Leave ministers want, I can't see any other way of things panning out.

Moggy wrote:This is the really interesting bit:

However, a leaked European Commission earlier this month showed that Dublin has Brussels staunch support in ensuring the controversy remains a priority.

It made clear that, in order to preserve the Good Friday Agreement, the Brexit divorce deal must respect “the integrity of the internal market and the customs union”, with Ireland remaining a member of both.

That meant the UK, to avoid a hard border with Northern Ireland, must also remain part of the customs union – something London has categorically ruled out, at least long term.

If Brexit means the end of the Good Friday Agreement, then we could be looking at a return to the days of IRA bombings on the mainland.

Yay, more good news!

Squinty wrote:I'm thankful he brought it up, because it's the burning question for me. We're still no clearer.

Cuttooth wrote:If there's any one thing that can break the destructive idea of a hard Brexit it's the Irish border issue.

The DUP can't support the government on anything full on Leave ministers want, I can't see any other way of things panning out.

Photek wrote:

Moggy wrote:This is the really interesting bit:

However, a leaked European Commission earlier this month showed that Dublin has Brussels staunch support in ensuring the controversy remains a priority.

It made clear that, in order to preserve the Good Friday Agreement, the Brexit divorce deal must respect “the integrity of the internal market and the customs union”, with Ireland remaining a member of both.

That meant the UK, to avoid a hard border with Northern Ireland, must also remain part of the customs union – something London has categorically ruled out, at least long term.

If Brexit means the end of the Good Friday Agreement, then we could be looking at a return to the days of IRA bombings on the mainland.

Yay, more good news!

No chance of that happening but it is odd that your government is saying talks were constructive and ours are like "eh?"

Moggy wrote:

Photek wrote:

Moggy wrote:This is the really interesting bit:

However, a leaked European Commission earlier this month showed that Dublin has Brussels staunch support in ensuring the controversy remains a priority.

It made clear that, in order to preserve the Good Friday Agreement, the Brexit divorce deal must respect “the integrity of the internal market and the customs union”, with Ireland remaining a member of both.

That meant the UK, to avoid a hard border with Northern Ireland, must also remain part of the customs union – something London has categorically ruled out, at least long term.

If Brexit means the end of the Good Friday Agreement, then we could be looking at a return to the days of IRA bombings on the mainland.

Yay, more good news!

No chance of that happening but it is odd that your government is saying talks were constructive and ours are like "eh?"

No chance of the Good Friday Agreement falling apart or no chance of the IRA resuming a bombing campaign if it does fall apart?

I'd say there was far more than "no chance" of either of those happening. Without an agreement, things are going to get messy and bitter and Northern Ireland is going to be in the middle of it.