Off Topic The Politics Thread

[Goldhawk-Road]

All the countries we are desperate to do trade deals with.

Sure, because a trade deal is preferable and no one is saying otherwise. But if we have to drop back to a prepared WTO situation with the EU it would not be Armageddon. Gisela Stuart, Labour leave and a German who understands the EU well, said yesterday that the EU and its member states never agrees anything until the 11th hour of the final day. That's how they do business, using power and brinkmanship. It's easy for member states at the moment, because Barnier's brick wall doesn't affect them. But if there is no deal, the heads of the 27 government will have to account to their electorate for why their trade has been adversely affected, security for their citizens has been badly marginalised, access to the City of London for businesses may be jeopardised, and why they are having to cough up a share of the £39bn that will not be paid by the UK but will be the subject of legal challenge and delay.

Something will be hammered out between the UK and the EU in the next couple of years, but for now, our government has to hold its nerve and prepare for a period of WTO trading.

 

[Goldhawk-Road]

For all those waiting for the EU to collapse, from a survey of member states.

You must log in or register to see images

Is this a poll undertaken by the European Parliament. If so, I'm willing to bet those canvassed for the UK didn't extend much outside Islington

 

[sb_73]

Sure, because a trade deal is preferable and no one is saying otherwise. But if we have to drop back to a prepared WTO situation with the EU it would not be Armageddon. Gisela Stuart, Labour leave and a German who understands the EU well, said yesterday that the EU and its member states never agrees anything until the 11th hour of the final day. That's how they do business, using power and brinkmanship. It's easy for member states at the moment, because Barnier's brick wall doesn't affect them. But if there is no deal, the heads of the 27 government will have to account to their electorate for why their trade has been adversely affected, security for their citizens has been badly marginalised, access to the City of London for businesses may be jeopardised, and why they are having to cough up a share of the £39bn that will not be paid by the UK but will be the subject of legal challenge and delay.

Something will be hammered out between the UK and the EU in the next couple of years, but for now, our government has to hold its nerve and prepare for a period of WTO trading.

Something has to be hammered out in the next couple of months Goldie. We haven’t agreed the withdrawal terms yet, largely because of the Irish border, and that has to be done by October to allow time for ratification by our Parliament, the EU parliament and all the parliaments (and some regions) of the 27. Without it a crash out in March next year is inevitable, unless we ask for an extension on the Article 50 deadline, which is looking increasingly likely. All this talk about the future trading relationship can wait until we are in the transition period, when everything stays as it is now except we don’t get a voice in the EU. Then we can keep on extending the transition period for the decade that it will take to negotiate a trade agreement. During that time we might have a pro EU government or even, god forbid, another referendum, and we can call the whole thing off, and pretend it never happened.

 

[sb_73]

Is this a poll undertaken by the European Parliament. If so, I'm willing to bet those canvassed for the UK didn't extend much outside Islington

Prove it, and who cares about the UK result?

 

[Uber_Hoop]

German journalist on Sky this morning, laying down the law and expressing the view that the UK will have to "capitulate" further to get any deal from the EU. Adam Boulton explained that people in this country may not appreciate a German telling them to capitulate further. This was met with a "whatever".

I think Boulton mentioned the war once, but got away with it.

 

[Goldhawk-Road]

Something has to be hammered out in the next couple of months Goldie. We haven’t agreed the withdrawal terms yet, largely because of the Irish border, and that has to be done by October to allow time for ratification by our Parliament, the EU parliament and all the parliaments (and some regions) of the 27. Without it a crash out in March next year is inevitable, unless we ask for an extension on the Article 50 deadline, which is looking increasingly likely. All this talk about the future trading relationship can wait until we are in the transition period, when everything stays as it is now except we don’t get a voice in the EU. Then we can keep on extending the transition period for the decade that it will take to negotiate a trade agreement. During that time we might have a pro EU government or even, god forbid, another referendum, and we can call the whole thing off, and pretend it never happened.

It only has to be hammered out by October if we're to leave in an orderly fashion (which of course, is desirable) . If the EU keeps demanding that we "capitulate", then there will be no deal, so the transition arrangement doesn't apply, we go onto WTO terms next March and the border with Ireland stays as it is. If the EU want to erect a hard border, then let them negotiate that with Ireland. We keep £39bn and no doubt the EU will want to open discussions about that post-March.

I don't think extending the transition period will go down well with the electorate here, unless for a very short period of time. WTO does look increasingly likely because the EU is already making noises that any agreed deal might not get through all 27 member states, or, if it does, the European Parliament which has to approve it. Raab needs to push no-deal right up his agenda.

 

[Stroller]

It only has to be hammered out by October if we're to leave in an orderly fashion (which of course, is desirable) . If the EU keeps demanding that we "capitulate", then there will be no deal, so the transition arrangement doesn't apply, we go onto WTO terms next March and the border with Ireland stays as it is. If the EU want to erect a hard border, then let them negotiate that with Ireland. We keep £39bn and no doubt the EU will want to open discussions about that post-March.

I don't think extending the transition period will go down well with the electorate here, unless for a very short period of time. WTO does look increasingly likely because the EU is already making noises that any agreed deal might not get through all 27 member states, or, if it does, the European Parliament which has to approve it. Raab needs to push no-deal right up his agenda.

If there is no deal, who will be to blame - the EU or the Tories?

 

[YorkshireHoopster]

I'm still struggling with the way many people come to a decision about how they're going to vote, or what side they're going to pick. Making an emotional choice based on misinformation is understandable, but when it becomes clear that it's not possible to be delivered, the rational response should not be "Let's just leave without a deal" - the "jumping off a cliff" approach.

Since when did jumping off a cliff resolve anything?

We have rejected the EU28 club. We should expect them to look after themselves. If we're angry with them, why wouldn't they be angry with us? If they feel a "no deal" departure would hurt them a bit and hurt us more, they'll just be angry at us for not working harder to find something that doesn't do that. Yes, they want us to have enough money to trade and buy from them. Yes, they want to keep costs down on the things they buy from us. Yes, they'd like us to stay and contribute to the club, as we have been doing to. But if we want to leave, why do some people in the UK think the EU27 should do all the work and make all the compromises? It's not realistic. They don't have to do anything if they're prepared for the consequences.

Leaving the EU28 isn't about beating the EU27. It should be about looking after the ordinary people in this country. If we cannot find a solution that does that, we should stop the process (if we can). Saying "we've changed our mind" is a step the egos of most of the people in this country won't accept at an emotional level. So that won't happen. Saying "No Deal" will cripple us economically and be dreadful for ordinary people. That shouldn't be allowed to happen - but... if lots of us look like we'd accept that and just get angry at the EU rather than at our own politicians (1984, anyone?) then some of our politicians will continue to push for it, so their own careers don't suffer.

Leaving should have the lowest negative economic impact possible and the most political separation possible. That's the solution we need to find and the EU27 should not be expected to do anything that is negative to their own club. Why would they? Except as neighbours and customers, they have no responsibility towards us once we're out.

What that means is we'll have to get used to the idea we can't get everything we want, because the two aspects (economics vs political separation) are often in conflict with each other.

What wouldn't hurt would be for us to spend more time pondering what unites us rather than arguing about what divides us.

Excellent post. I note the news probably true but no doubt it will be attacked as fake that Germany is preparing for a no deal scenario and that Europe is worth far more to their businesses than the UK is. The whole 'No deal' scenario is Operation Fear by the Brexiteers towards the 27. It'll be interesting to see if it works but hope we, the ordinary people don't have to live with the consequences. John Major a politician who has never struck me as someone who would speak dishonestly if he perceived there was benefit for him in doing so, has spoken about the disastrous effect he believes a No Deal scenario would have on the weakest and poorest in our society. May can see that. Boris I'm not convinced can see anything at all whereas JRM seems to me to not care at all about the impact on others not as well off as he is.

 

[West London Willy]

I'm not scared of a second vote and I don't think I said I was. I'm just against referendums being re-run till certain sections of the population and ruling classes get the result they want. The EU, of course, have previous in this regard.
I said that I feel the Tories have made such a mess of it that people will just want to revert back if we have a second vote.



They've already had that opportunity Willy, remember? Democracy isn't re-running referendums because certain factions don't like the result.

Democracy isn’t a one time thing, just because some people got the result they wanted. If it’s clear (and it is) that the British piblic are now in favour of remaining, to ignore that and simply say that they made a choice 2 years ago is the opposite of the true, self-governing democracy that Leavers say they want.

Unless, of course, Remain have been right all along, and you don’t KNOW what you want?

 

[West London Willy]

Prove it, and who cares about the UK result?

Something I’m seeing all the time: Leave voters being presented with a poll and questioning the results.

Something they have been berating Remainers for doing (often viciously and violently) for two years.

I think it’s about time that Leavers stop arguing and accept that the polls say the majority of voters want to stay in now, according to the polls.

 

[sb_73]

It only has to be hammered out by October if we're to leave in an orderly fashion (which of course, is desirable) . If the EU keeps demanding that we "capitulate", then there will be no deal, so the transition arrangement doesn't apply, we go onto WTO terms next March and the border with Ireland stays as it is. If the EU want to erect a hard border, then let them negotiate that with Ireland. We keep £39bn and no doubt the EU will want to open discussions about that post-March.

I don't think extending the transition period will go down well with the electorate here, unless for a very short period of time. WTO does look increasingly likely because the EU is already making noises that any agreed deal might not get through all 27 member states, or, if it does, the European Parliament which has to approve it. Raab needs to push no-deal right up his agenda.

If I understood your post correctly it was one German journalist on a Murdoch TV show using the word ‘capitulate’ not the EU.

If we go onto WTO terms a properly maintained border with Ireland will have to be put up, so we can charge tariffs on goods crossing it and so the EU can do the same the other way. The WTO would require it, unless we are opting out of that as well. Plus an open border, as at present, would be an open backdoor to the UK for migrants, including the dreaded refugees not from the EU.

There is plenty of time to at least get the future relationship negotiations on track once we have agreed the terms of withdrawal. We’ve had more than two years to do this, and we keep on being told that we are 80% of the way there. It’s the withdrawal agreement that needs ratifying, and the 27 have been very solid on that, it was May’s decision to start linking withdrawal with future relationship which has led us to where we are now.

Anyway, we have different perspectives and all this tedious detail is just that, tedious.

 

[West London Willy]

If there is no deal, who will be to blame - the EU or the Tories?

The Media. Far too divisive and opinion forming. Weak populist politicians as well.

 

[sb_73]

Something I’m seeing all the time: Leave voters being presented with a poll and questioning the results.

Something they have been berating Remainers for doing (often viciously and violently) for two years.

I think it’s about time that Leavers stop arguing and accept that the polls say the majority of voters want to stay in now, according to the polls.

I think Goldie took my post in the spirit in which it was intended.

As an increasingly disillusioned remainer, I wish vocal remainers would stop whining quite so much and accept some responsibility for the way the vote went. Clarke, Soubry, Cable, Blair, Campbell, Milliband D, etc all those smug talking heads are really doing a **** job.

 

[Goldhawk-Road]

If there is no deal, who will be to blame - the EU or the Tories?

I'm no soothsayer but it's likely to be the EU. The White Paper goes a long, long way to a compromise. If the Brussels bullies want to throw their weight around, there'll be consequences.

 

[Stroller]

I'm no soothsayer but it's likely to be the EU. The White Paper goes a long, long way to a compromise. If the Brussels bullies want to throw their weight around, there'll be consequences.

I thought you were a soothsayer, Goldie. You've long been foretelling blood on the streets if Brexit is denied somehow, and now you talk darkly of 'consequences'. The EU have been patiently waiting for our government to come up with a plan, so that they can consider it and respond. The real bullies are the extremists in the Tory party who will not accept May's proposals. If May can't get her own party to agree, how can the EU be held responsible?

 

[Goldhawk-Road]

If I understood your post correctly it was one German journalist on a Murdoch TV show using the word ‘capitulate’ not the EU.

If we go onto WTO terms a properly maintained border with Ireland will have to be put up, so we can charge tariffs on goods crossing it and so the EU can do the same the other way. The WTO would require it, unless we are opting out of that as well. Plus an open border, as at present, would be an open backdoor to the UK for migrants, including the dreaded refugees not from the EU.

There is plenty of time to at least get the future relationship negotiations on track once we have agreed the terms of withdrawal. We’ve had more than two years to do this, and we keep on being told that we are 80% of the way there. It’s the withdrawal agreement that needs ratifying, and the 27 have been very solid on that, it was May’s decision to start linking withdrawal with future relationship which has led us to where we are now.

Anyway, we have different perspectives and all this tedious detail is just that, tedious.

I think the German journalist was an outside reviewer/guest brought in by Sky.

The UK doesn't have to charge tariffs on Irish goods but under the WTO most favoured nation rule, it would have to drop tariffs on all WTO imports. This is a possibility if we went to encourage trading with the UK and obviously good for the UK consumer. As to illegal immigrants, there would have to be checks, but not necessarily at the border.

I imagine a future trading arrangement also needs ratification, alongside the withdrawal agreement. I agree with criticism of May who originally agreed they should be negotiated consecutively - but she did say that there was no deal until everything is agreed - they should have been done in tandem imo

Tedious detail, yes. But increasingly vital to know what WTO for EU countries will look like.

 

[Goldhawk-Road]

I thought you were a soothsayer, Goldie. You've long been foretelling blood on the streets if Brexit is denied somehow, and now you talk darkly of 'consequences'. The EU have been patiently waiting for our government to come up with a plan, so that they can consider it and respond. The real bullies are the extremists in the Tory party who will not accept May's proposals. If May can't get her own party to agree, how can the EU be held responsible?

Nothing dark about "consequences". If the EU try to greatly water down the White Paper, we're into WTO. It's not desirable but it's doable.

You seem to accept a sort of avuncular love from the EU, Strolls. Do you approve of Selmayr leaking confidential information to the press? The Irish drama queen threatening a return to violence at the Irish border and that we won't be able to fly over their skies (forgetting that they have to fly over ours)? The EU have not compromised on anything to date, nothing. Just as they compromised on nothing when Cameron came to them, and this led to the referendum which you so revile. Don't you see a pattern emerging?

 

[Stroller]

Nothing dark about "consequences". If the EU try to greatly water down the White Paper, we're into WTO. It's not desirable but it's doable.

You seem to accept a sort of avuncular love from the EU, Strolls. Do you approve of Selmayr leaking confidential information to the press? The Irish drama queen threatening a return to violence at the Irish border and that we won't be able to fly over their skies (forgetting that they have to fly over ours)? The EU have not compromised on anything to date, nothing. Just as they compromised on nothing when Cameron came to them, and this led to the referendum which you so revile. Don't you see a pattern emerging?

There's plenty to dislike about the EU, but I'd still rather be in it trying to change it. All this talk of EU bullying is bullshit, though. We haven't even been able to say what we want until a couple of weeks ago. As I said, the real bullies are Rees-Mogg and his gang.

 

[Goldhawk-Road]

There's plenty to dislike about the EU, but I'd still rather be in it trying to change it. All this talk of EU bullying is bullshit, though. We haven't even been able to say what we want until a couple of weeks ago. As I said, the real bullies are Rees-Mogg and his gang.

We'll agree to differ. The EU bullies and threatens every country that tries to leave it. JRM's description of them as mafia is about right. That's why I see the WTO preparation as vital. For every EU supporter like yourself, there is at least one (and probably more) UK citizen that has an increasingly visceral hatred of the EU, particularly Brussels lead by that drunkard Junckers and "the Monster" Selmayr. How the EU reacts in the next months will determine just how deep that animosity among UK leavers will go.

 

[sb_73]

I think the German journalist was an outside reviewer/guest brought in by Sky.

The UK doesn't have to charge tariffs on Irish goods but under the WTO most favoured nation rule, it would have to drop tariffs on all WTO imports. This is a possibility if we went to encourage trading with the UK and obviously good for the UK consumer. As to illegal immigrants, there would have to be checks, but not necessarily at the border.

I imagine a future trading arrangement also needs ratification, alongside the withdrawal agreement. I agree with criticism of May who originally agreed they should be negotiated consecutively - but she did say that there was no deal until everything is agreed - they should have been done in tandem imo

Tedious detail, yes. But increasingly vital to know what WTO for EU countries will look like.

You seem knowledgeable on the WTO stuff Goldie, could we, if we wanted, just say we will impose no tariffs on any imports from anywhere (assuming we will still want to have some kind of minimum quality and safety standards for stuff, of course). How does WTO relate to services, if at all?

Yes, a trade treaty would need to be ratified by all.