Off Topic The Politics Thread

[Goldhawk-Road]

The main problem with that is that our surplus with the rest of the World is dependent on our EU. membership. As members we have preferential conditions in 50 non EU. markets, which would all need to be renegotiated in the event of withdrawal from the EU. A hard Brexit does not only damage our trading relationship to the EU. but to the rest of the World - all those trade agreements, which we have as members, would have to be renegotiated.

But in the interim, we trade on WTO terms, so trade goes on. And we can fix the tariffs, so long as we apply them consistently across all countries we trade with

 

[Goldhawk-Road]

Some forget Barnier has a mandate to strike a deal and if there is a 'no deal' which is looking more likely you would have to ask a question... if the EU is so good with business, how come like all other businesses they can't adapt to strike a deal?

Truth is Goldie and we have said this all along, the EU will never adapt . It is set up for Germany and France.
People on here have mocked me for my stance but day by day the EU is showing everyone (apart from the die-hard freaks) that this union is not actually very good.

If may is not strong she will lose her job, be the worse PM in history, kill the Tories and end democracy in this country. Surely she must listen and tell them where to go.

Agree about Germany and France, but how happy are the German car workers that are laid off as a result a no deal because of the Irish border, going to be with Mrs Merkel?

 

[ELLERS]

Agree about Germany and France, but how happy are the German car workers that are laid off as a result a no deal because of the Irish border, going to be with Mrs Merkel?

You see how much they care about Ireland if it means a 'no deal'? People (not you) should realise that they weren't interested in Ireland at the start. It is just an excuse to break Brexit.

Theresa May could not agree to stay in the Customs Union, because this will prevent the UK making trade agreements with countries outside the EU. If she tried it, half her cabinet would resign and she'd face a vote of no confidence.

Spot on she could never agree to that because she could never get it past parliament or the nation. It's really stupid of the EU to think we would agree to that? But then again?

 

[Stroller]

Theresa May could not agree to stay in the Customs Union, because this will prevent the UK making trade agreements with countries outside the EU. If she tried it, half her cabinet would resign and she'd face a vote of no confidence.

Some might resign, but they wouldn't be much of a loss. I don't think there'd be a no confidence vote in Parliament, but there might well be a leadership challenge.

Spot on she could never agree to that because she could never get it past parliament or the nation. It's really stupid of the EU to think we would agree to that? But then again?

The thing is, it's probably the only deal that she could get through Parliament because Labour would support it.

 

[Goldhawk-Road]

Some might resign, but they wouldn't be much of a loss. I don't think there'd be a no confidence vote in Parliament, but there might well be a leadership challenge.

I'm not sure there's any difference, is there?:

https://inews.co.uk/news/brexit/no-confidence-vote-theresa-may/

 

[ELLERS]

Agree about Germany and France, but how happy are the German car workers that are laid off as a result a no deal because of the Irish border, going to be with Mrs Merkel?

Funny you should mention Merkel Goldie as she has now stepped into the ring and being more vocal...Is she worried?

 

[Goldhawk-Road]

The thing is, it's probably the only deal that she could get through Parliament because Labour would support it.

Labour hasn't been clear whether it will vote against a deal that doesn't meet its (imo unrealistic) criteria or merely abstain. There are a number of Labour MP's like Caroline Flint who would vote with the government rather than risk a no-deal

 

[ELLERS]

Some might resign, but they wouldn't be much of a loss. I don't think there'd be a no confidence vote in Parliament, but there might well be a leadership challenge.



The thing is, it's probably the only deal that she could get through Parliament because Labour would support it.

Labour won't support anything. They just want an opportunist election.

 

[Goldhawk-Road]

Funny you should mention Merkel Goldie as she has now stepped into the ring and being more vocal...Is she worried?

Given the huge goods imports that the UK takes from Germany, if there was a no-deal, it would hit Merkel hard, at a time when she can least afford it. All because Brussels can't reach a practical agreement on the border with Ireland. I just don't believe she would let it happen, but at the present time, she still hopes Theresa will fold and as usual, the EU will take things to the eleventh hour

 

[Deleted.......]

Labour hasn't been clear whether it will vote against a deal that doesn't meet its (imo unrealistic) criteria or merely abstain. There are a number of Labour MP's like Caroline Flint who would vote with the government rather than risk a no-deal

A lot of Labour MPs have started to make much more positive noises about supporting the Government. In the space of a week it's gone from being along the lines of "we won't support them at all" to "well as long as it has x and y in it then we might". I think there'll be enough of them to prevent no deal going through Parliament. Can't imagine Caroline Lucas or the Lib Dems voting any other way either tbh.

 

[Goldhawk-Road]

A lot of Labour MPs have started to make much more positive noises about supporting the Government. In the space of a week it's gone from being along the lines of "we won't support them at all" to "well as long as it has x and y in it then we might". I think there'll be enough of them to prevent no deal going through Parliament. Can't imagine Caroline Lucas or the Lib Dems voting any other way either tbh.

Agree, Dan. Labour MP's that vote against, and bring about a no-deal, will have to explain themselves to their constituents. And a lot of Labour MP's up north have a majority of Leave voters.

 

[Stroller]

Labour hasn't been clear whether it will vote against a deal that doesn't meet its (imo unrealistic) criteria or merely abstain. There are a number of Labour MP's like Caroline Flint who would vote with the government rather than risk a no-deal

Labour has set out 6 tests upon which to judge whatever deal May might come up with:

Does it ensure a strong and collaborative future relationship with the EU?
Does it deliver the “exact same benefits” as we currently have as members of the Single Market and Customs Union?
Does it ensure the fair management of migration in the interests of the economy and communities?
Does it defend rights and protections and prevent a race to the bottom?
Does it protect national security and our capacity to tackle cross-border crime?
Does it deliver for all regions and nations of the UK?

The only one of those that seems unrealistic to me is the second one, but that wasn't just chucked in to be difficult, it's exactly what May and Davis promised they would get.

In his conference speech, Corbyn said to May “If you deliver a deal that includes a customs union and no hard border in Ireland, if you protect jobs, people’s rights at work and environmental and consumer standards – then we will support that sensible deal. A deal that would be backed by most of the business world and trade unions too.”

She's going to have accept staying in a Customs Union to get a deal through Parliament, it seems to me.

 

[ELLERS]

Sadly labours 6 tests don't add up. It must have been Abbott that did the maths. When you read them it basically says we can disagree whatever you do.
Labour mentioned about free deals with other countries and in same breath said stay in Customs union/single market.... They really are a poor lot. Even at Parliment yesterday Corbyn looked weaker with every point.

 

[Stroller]

Sadly labours 6 tests don't add up. It must have been Abbott that did the maths. When you read them it basically says we can disagree whatever you do.
Labour mentioned about free deals with other countries and in same breath said stay in Customs union/single market.... They really are a poor lot. Even at Parliment yesterday Corbyn looked weaker with every point.

I'm sure Labour accept that being in a customs union with the EU precludes exclusive trade deals elsewhere (perhaps you misheard), in fact I heard Starmer say exactly that on the Today programme yesterday. His point was that they believe that we can get better deals in conjunction with the EU than we could on our own.

 

[Staines R's]

I’ve heard shops are fast running out of avacados and prawns in preparation for Saturday’s ‘March of the Middle Class’.......

Any of the ‘Not606 elite’ going ?

 

[Goldhawk-Road]

Labour has set out 6 tests upon which to judge whatever deal May might come up with:

Does it ensure a strong and collaborative future relationship with the EU?
Does it deliver the “exact same benefits” as we currently have as members of the Single Market and Customs Union?
Does it ensure the fair management of migration in the interests of the economy and communities?
Does it defend rights and protections and prevent a race to the bottom?
Does it protect national security and our capacity to tackle cross-border crime?
Does it deliver for all regions and nations of the UK?

The only one of those that seems unrealistic to me is the second one, but that wasn't just chucked in to be difficult, it's exactly what May and Davis promised they would get.

In his conference speech, Corbyn said to May “If you deliver a deal that includes a customs union and no hard border in Ireland, if you protect jobs, people’s rights at work and environmental and consumer standards – then we will support that sensible deal. A deal that would be backed by most of the business world and trade unions too.”

She's going to have accept staying in a Customs Union to get a deal through Parliament, it seems to me.

Test Number 2 is so patently obviously unachievable that voters will see through it. Labour want to be able say the Tories have failed the tests so they can oppose the deal and try to force a general election. If it's seen as putting their party before the country it could damage them.

As far as Starmer is concerned, his middle name should be BRINO. He wants to dupe the people imo into believing they will get Brexit when in fact we will still have all the restrictions but don't have a say in making the rules.

I hear what you say about the Customs Union, Strolls, and we'll see. I don't agree with you. I think we'll head for a no deal, and the EU will suddenly come up with some fudge that gets through. It's interesting that of all Northern Ireland trade, over 80% is with the rest of the UK. Only 4% goes over the border to Eire.

 

[Stroller]

Test Number 2 is so patently obviously unachievable that voters will see through it. Labour want to be able say the Tories have failed the tests so they can oppose the deal and try to force a general election. If it's seen as putting their party before the country it could damage them.

As far as Starmer is concerned, his middle name should be BRINO. He wants to dupe the people imo into believing they will get Brexit when in fact we will still have all the restrictions but don't have a say in making the rules.

I hear what you say about the Customs Union, Strolls, and we'll see. I don't agree with you. I think we'll head for a no deal, and the EU will suddenly come up with some fudge that gets through. It's interesting that of all Northern Ireland trade, over 80% is with the rest of the UK. Only 4% goes over the border to Eire.

Test number 2 is certainly unachievable, Goldie. It's the 'cake' option. It does make one wonder why May and Davis would have said they could achieve it, though.

 

[Goldhawk-Road]

Test number 2 is certainly unachievable, Goldie. It's the 'cake' option. It does make one wonder why May and Davis would have said they could achieve it, though.

Agree. I'm not sure when they did say it, I've looked for a quote and couldn't find it. It could be pre-negotiation bluster. Asking for the world but accepting less when a deal is finalised.

 

[Stroller]

Agree. I'm not sure when they did say it, I've looked for a quote and couldn't find it. It could be pre-negotiation bluster. Asking for the world but accepting less when a deal is finalised.

It's here...

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/...-promise-article-50-theresa-may-a7657426.html

Mr Davis made the claim in answer to a question from Conservative MP Anna Soubry in the Commons in January, when he said: “What we have come up with … is the idea of a comprehensive free trade agreement and a comprehensive customs agreement that will deliver the exact same benefits as we have.”

Of course, Labour were being mischievous in quoting him in their 'test'.

 

[Goldhawk-Road]

It's here...

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/...-promise-article-50-theresa-may-a7657426.html

Mr Davis made the claim in answer to a question from Conservative MP Anna Soubry in the Commons in January, when he said: “What we have come up with … is the idea of a comprehensive free trade agreement and a comprehensive customs agreement that will deliver the exact same benefits as we have.”

Of course, Labour were being mischievous in quoting him in their 'test'.

Yes, thanks, it'll be interesting to see how literally the Labour Party press for "exact same benefits". It could be a double edged sword for them if it's seen to be a cynical ploy to disrupt vital national negotiations. On the other hand, Remainers will like it.