I confess I’ve not waded through the 585 pages of legalese that makes up the draft agreement of the UK’s withdrawal from the EU (thanks PCar for the link), but the reaction on Twitter tells me:
1. Free movement of people is ended.
2. The UK remains in the customs union indefinitely.
What’s interesting is Leavers are irate beyond measure which suggests, contrary to their portrayal in the media, they weren’t driven by immigration. If that were the case, they’d not be too disappointed with an agreement which halted free movement. That they are more upset about continued membership of the customs union suggests sovereignty and independence were equally as important as ending free movement. None of this should come as a surprise to those who know any Leave voters.
However, Remainers are equally unhappy, presumably because free movement will end along with a whole load of taxpayer funded schemes which prop up swathes of the middle class left. They’ll be joining Leavers in writing to their MPs urging them to vote against the bill when it’s put before parliament. Jeremy Corbyn, who must be relishing this, has already said he’ll vote against it so May is relying on Labour rebels to offset those in her own party. I think this vote will be the most heavily scrutinised in recent memory, with every MP’s reputation for the next few years depending on which way they cast their ballot. I imagine many of them didn’t get much sleep last night. This is how it should be, and for once it’s nice to see the public – both Leavers and Remainers – holding their representatives’ feet to the fire.
Here’s what I reckon will happen. The agreement will be voted down and May will leave; either she’ll resign or will be shoved out by her own party, along with anyone in the cabinet who assented to it. A general election will be called leaving the Tories with two options:
1. Pick a Remain leader and cabinet and we all start preparing for Prime Minister Jeremy Corbyn.
2. Pick a Leave leader and cabinet, win the election, chuck the draft in the bin, and start negotiations again.
Much as though I’d prefer to see No. 2 happen, if the Tories had that sort of gumption they’d have done it already. Unless some have been working tirelessly behind the scenes preparing a realistic plan which can immediately be placed in front of Barnier, it’s just going to be more hot air before we crash out with no deal. I’d not be too disappointed if the Tories’ stated intention is to crash out with no deal, but if that’s what happens by default because they’re too hapless to get a plan together, it’s hardly a demonstration of the sort of leadership Britain will need in the near future.
So I suspect they’ll pick a total wet as leader who nobody will vote for and Corbyn will get in. From what I’m reading on Twitter, which to be fair is probably not a great representation, people are prepared to suffer a Corbyn government rather than continue to support the Conservatives, such are their feelings of betrayal. Oddly, I’m half minded to think Corbyn and Co. could negotiate a better deal than May’s managed. He’d certainly not turn up looking to please everyone, and idiotic his beliefs might be he might inadvertently get Britain out of the EU in a way which leaves Brexiteers satisfied.
What I’d really like to see, though, is the Metropolitan New Labour/Cameron remnants who think the EU is wonderful and the referendum an abomination forced to start their own party, in the same way UKIP was founded to represent those who wanted to leave. Thus far, they’ve assumed they can wrestle back control of the existing levers of power against the wishes of the people. Two anti-EU parties contesting a General Election would be the slap in the face they need to show them they’re no longer representative of the wider UK. There’s little that would make me happier than a bunch of whining London-based media types launching a party and seeing their ideas roundly ignored by all but themselves. They could even make Blair their leader.
The sad fact is that the only party leader of the current 3 who has consistently throughout his career supported leaving the EU is Jeremy Corbyn. I’m beginning to wonder if he’s our only chance of getting out properly. I’d be prepared to face a Corbyn government if it meant a true Leaver was in No 10.
They could even make Blair their leader
I assume that’s tongue-in-cheek. Any party with Blair as leader would be on a hiding to nothing. I never liked him, that TV Evangelist faux sincerity is particularly grating.
May was given the job to scupper Brexit, she played a blinder.
Western democracies everywhere are proving hands down that democracy is a failure (successful for elites though) and judging by the new low lifes that have just been given voting rights in the US, there is worse to come.
“Democracy’ is two wolves and a sheep voting on what to have for dinner. ‘Liberty’ is a well-armed lamb contesting the vote.” Former US President, Thomas Jefferson
…………………………………………………………………………………….
Let the People Vote
America finally has a pro-democracy movement — and it did very well at the polls last week.
The United States finally has the pro-democracy movement that it needs.
Last week, ballot initiatives to improve the functioning of democracy fared very well. In Florida — a state divided nearly equally between right and left — more than 64 percent of voters approved restoring the franchise to 1.4 million people with felony convictions. In Colorado, Michigan and Missouri, measures to reduce gerrymandering passed. In Maryland, Michigan and Nevada, measures to simplify voter registration passed. “In red states as well as blue states,” Chiraag Bains of the think tank Demos says, “voters overwhelmingly sent the message: We’re taking our democracy back.”
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/11/11/opinion/democrats-midterms-resistance-trump-democracy.html
If she faces a leadership challenge (and if you are tory and don’t like her deal you may as well do it now, later is moot)
Maybe she wins – back to can she get her deal voted through
If she loses then do we see her successor pivot to no-deal as the base case (the only practical project management approach).
Or she loses and we see some compromise candidate who still trys to fix this abortion of a deal.
If she gets it to a vote:
The legal advice will say that the UK has some rights.
The ability in practice to exercise those rights will be negligible (which is how the gap was bridged in negotiation).
Some MPs will point at the legal advice and vote for her deal. Could go either way
If the deal is voted down then May should resign (should, not will).
If you are tory why would you vote to bring forward an election you would lose? So most likely her successor either pivots to no-deal or wastes more time on a reneg.
The civil service and government have had over 24 months to properly plan no-deal. They have instead passed legislation on plastic straws, upskirting, and forcing the publication of gender pay gap stats that the ONS declared are nonsense. Seems fair that christmas holidays get cancelled in order for the work to get done.
No-deal will be short term disruption, long term could be fine. Could be as the retards in power have hardly used the last 2 years to focus on anything sensible, or displayed any appetite for deregulation.
I don’t think May’s deal will make it to Parliament. I think the Tories are finally ready to dump her.
The essential thing in that scenario is to make sure that one Leaver, whether Johnson, Davis or Rees-Mogg, or whoever, gets through to the final two. If the Leavers fight amongst themselves and split the Leave vote and let a Remainer get in as leader again then the party is doomed.
I’d be all for a Corbyn gov’t. It’ll bring forward the day of purification, and besides, I don’t live there anymore anyway.
What’s interesting is Leavers are irate beyond measure which suggests, contrary to their portrayal in the media, they weren’t driven by immigration. […] None of this should come as a surprise to those who know any Leave voters.
I dunno, I recall reading something by a bloke from the Leave campaign, and he made the point that immigration and the ol’ “We could spend 350 million on the NHS” was what swung it; that free trade and the Anglosphere and all the other arguments popular on classical liberal blogs and their comments were total losers, electorally speaking.
Which sadly makes sense: the average Briton can’t even spell sovereignty, they certainly don’t give a shit about it.
Whatever the short term answer some deeper themes emerge. The EU, through Barnier, have inflicted upon the UK a major tactical defeat. In doing so I think they have inflicted upon themselves a strategic defeat of Treaty of Versailles proportions. UK / EU relations and the clarity of understanding of the attitude of the EU to its peoples is going to be utterly poisonous for the foreseeable. The EU is clearly a prison that is delighted to inflict any level of misery on its members and their people to maintain its hegemony. That never ends well.
1) The agreement will be voted down and May will leave; either she’ll resign or will be shoved out by her own party, along with anyone in the cabinet who assented to it.
2) A general election will be called leaving the Tories with two options.
I think there’s a line or two of the working missing there. Why should there be an obligation to call a general election? In any event the 29th March Brexit date is fixed so there probably isn’t time for any manoeuvering.
@Patrick +1
“Whatever the short term answer some deeper themes emerge. The EU, through Barnier, have inflicted upon the UK a major tactical defeat. In doing so I think they have inflicted upon themselves a strategic defeat of Treaty of Versailles proportions”
@Matthew
“I dunno, I recall reading something by a bloke from the Leave campaign, and he made the point that immigration and the ol’ “We could spend 350 million on the NHS” was what swung it; ”
Polling shows that sovereignty was the most popular reason. Immigration close behind, but more detailed polling shows that people don’t care about old-EU it is the recent-EU.
I’m certainly not too bothered by free movement, although Europe’s porousness puts me off.
I’m much more concerned with the influx of 3rd world peasants.
The jobs concerns on free movement could be dealt with by changes to tax, benefits and the minimum wage* to make work a more attractive option for Brits.
*I am happy with fewer, better jobs.
The leavers do not have a workable plan, never have done. That is the problem.
It is all free unicorn milk for breakfast, not something that will actually work. All visions are constrained by reality eventually, this bunch have simply refused to acknowledge that, rightly or wrongly, the rest of the world isn’t going to conform to what they think it should be.I
Mc, the leavers have voted for more 3rd world peasants. Get wit democracy won’t you?
Europe has a serious southern border problem, which will not be solved by any one country. At least a few of those countries now have governments who do want to close the med border, and shut down the people smuggling “NGOs:.
A cold harsh wind must blow through Whitehall, the permanent govt has caused irreparable damage by carrying water for a hostile foreign power. The technocracy is operating out side of any meaningful political control and has done so for far too long.
There is a very simple riposte.
Pull this shit with a G7 member and you can take NATO membership with you. If this is what you (Europe plural) think is the most appropriate way to treat a sovereign nstion, the UK doesn’t need to be expending blood and treasure patrolling the Baltic or the Black Sea or elsewhere.
You’re on your own. Go forth and multiply.
Taking sides by getting involved in a Franco German border dispute was one of the worst acts of self harm committed by any nation in the past 200 years.
Why should there be an obligation to call a general election?
Because I can’t see that a new Prime Minister who hasn’t been endoresed in a GE will get his agreement passed in parliament. It’s possible, but I think at this stage the Tories have blown their right to have their plans endorsed without another GE.
In any event the 29th March Brexit date is fixed so there probably isn’t time for any manoeuvering.
I don’t see that being a major problem, provided there’s another plan ready to go, and is presented at a GE. If not, well, we’re back to a bunch of squabbling children, aren’t we?
All visions are constrained by reality eventually, this bunch have simply refused to acknowledge that, rightly or wrongly, the rest of the world isn’t going to conform to what they think it should be.
That’s certainly part of the problem, but I think the larger problem is the British ruling classes have conspired with their counterparts in Europe to try to scupper any attempt by Britain to leave in any meaningful sense.
The EU, through Barnier, have inflicted upon the UK a major tactical defeat. In doing so I think they have inflicted upon themselves a strategic defeat of Treaty of Versailles proportions
That’s a reasonable assessment.
I don’t think it’s a strategic self-inflicted defeat because most continental Europeans simply take no notice of the EU day-to-day. It’s not obtrusive, its acts are more visible for the things you no longer have to do like show a passport at the non-existent border checkpoints, or change money. It is certainly not the all-consuming issue it has been in the UK for the last decade or more.
I don’t believe for a minute that your average leaver in Sunderland even knows what a customs union is, let alone has a considered opinion on whether the benefits outweigh the costs or vice versa. Most decisions are emotional, especially political decisions, and are driven by a knee-jerk response to one side of one issue, in this case jerbs, darkies, Brussels bureaucrats making people fill in forms all the time*, or even stealing our good old pounds and ounces.
*: I did actually fill in a form for Brussels once, when I was a student. They gave me some money as a result.
BiG – The EU has just shown it will play hardball with anyone that threatens its cosy control. Control exercised in the absence of democracy (my definition thereof being: 1. You can vote the buggers out; and 2. You get to choose a different policy thereby).
The peeps in Stuttgart will notice as and when we move into a No Deal outcome. Germany is already in recession (for the latest quarter). A global recession and market collapse is imminent. Political chaos in the world’s 5th largest economy will help precipitate that. Double plus ungood for an economy dependent on exports. How will Deutsche Bank or the Italian banking system fare in this upcoming crash?
My second emerging big theme is that this is a kind of endgame in the UK for a long running war between the political class and the man in the street. We got to this point because those we elect have either misrepresented themselves to us or gone back on their promises or simply sidelined us for decades. That we didn’t get to vote on Maastricht or Lisbon in referenda explains precisely why we are where we are and why populism is running rampant everywhere. If you are not a fully signed up social democracy SJW activist then most politicians think you should fuck off. Occasionally the people seek to reassert themselves and remind where actual sovereignty lies. I’m afraid I think we need a political catastrophe. The subtext to today is really saying we are not a democracy but a bureaucracy. That never ends well.
And in other news around the world today………………….
Will Netanyahu call snap elections?
The last is easy to answer – D. is already toast. Sell your shares. I don’t know about Italian banks, but if the government keeps borrowing as they say they will, they are done too. What they are doing to their own finances, you would elsewhere criticise as the inevitable results of socialist excess, envy and greed. Because it’s a eurozone country apparently the euro is at fault.
The euro will, as with Greece, be scapegoated for the government’s incontinence. No one will “crash out”, because it isn’t (as Greece proved) in the interests of a bankrupt government to leave a currency union.
Other than that, recessions happen. Market collapses happen. I forget how many I have seen in my life time. Investors lose money. They get over it.
I predict you will see a major policy change in the EU on migration in the next 3 years. It is a big ship and takes a long time to turn around, but they are no longer taking the lead from Merkel. Closing the med border has to be an international effort and the EU already has the tools in place to do it. It just needs broader political agreement and co-ordination of authority along the med border.
the leavers have voted for more 3rd world peasants
No they didn’t. But you know that.
You also know that your assertion that Leavers had no plan is bullshit, but our Remain PM and civil disservice sidelined them very nicely – a good demonstration of where her skills lie.
What was the plan then? Oh yes:
1: 350 million for the NHS.
2: Er,…
3: That’s it!
@Patrick
John Adams a great American admirer of the British Constitution warned many years before what would happen if parliament unlawfully took power away:
“[executive power] will corrupt the legislature as necessarily as rust corrupts iron … and when the legislature is corrupted, the people are undone.”
Where are the Barons, who will petition the crown?
Did someone try and grab big ears and knock some sense into him today or was it his birthday and just not the right thing to do?
Throw democracy out on its arse, because the elites love a democracy, as this little bunch can very effectively control the majority and all done under the illusion of choice.
Bring back voting rights for men and property owners only.
“In a Democracy, the vote of two idiots counts for twice as much as that of one wise man.” Adolf Hitler
Yes the UK ruling class is in bed with the EU, that was how widening and deepening was supposed to work, basically the EU redistributes cash via projects which offer patronage throughout the political classes in each state. There’s something for all levels from grandees topping up pensions as commissioners, down to (senior) local politicians who get baubles from various EU backed quangos etc. In the UK’s case (as in case of Germany and sometimes France) this was basically just a slice of our own money, in the net benefactor states it was their own money topped up by Germany and UK and sometimes France. But it was all quite deliberate, and whilst morally and ethically questionable, it’s no more so than any other form of established clientelism.
The big problem is that for 50 years the UK has engaged in sustained political and economic integration with the other members of the EU, for good and bad. Hard core Leavers sold the delusion that we could magically unpick all that detailed negotiation and stroll into some mythical land of milk and honey that strangely nobody else has found yet. Of course it wasn’t possible. I have a close friend who is a hard Brexiter kipper, he’s an educated man, works in the City, but utterly refuses to acknowledge the details. As far as he’s concerned we go WTO and it’s okay, we can have some extreme libertarian revolution, and the poor people will be able to buy cheap US chlorinated chicken, hormone raised beef, pink slime and pus riddled milk (seriously, this is what he thinks!!!). It doesn’t matter that major economies do their best not to trade on WTO terms, it doesn’t matter that there’s shit loads of other things tied up in 50 years of negotiations, going WTO is much simpler than dealing with all those pesky details.
Now I don’t like the EU as an institution, but the cold reality is that deal or no deal are both materially worse than membership in economic terms. Hitching ourselves to US special interests isn’t the buccaneering free trading utopia bought politicians claim. And the commonwealth wants to trade with the EU more than with a standalone UK. The whole thing is a giant fantasy, that’s why none of it makes sense when you start tugging at the threads.
@MJW:
Hard core Leavers sold the delusion that we could magically unpick all that detailed negotiation and stroll into some mythical land of milk and honey that strangely nobody else has found yet.
Remainers seem incapable of realising that the majority of the countries in the world are not in the EU
As far as he’s concerned we go WTO and it’s okay, we can have some extreme libertarian revolution, and the poor people will be able to buy cheap US chlorinated chicken, hormone raised beef, pink slime and pus riddled milk (seriously, this is what he thinks!!!)
I find it odd that Remainers act like importing products made in the US (boo, hiss!!!), that pass US (boo, hiss!!) regulations, is some terrible outcome and that these products are not fit for enlightened EU consumption.
Now I don’t like the EU as an institution, but the cold reality is that deal or no deal are both materially worse than membership in economic terms.
Please think beyond the next 5-10 years. This was a vote for the very long future. Yes there will be an economic impact in the near future. But
that hit would only get bigger as we get more intertwined in the political union. And staying with it ties us permanently to a sinking ship with no life boats. Better to get out now, take the relatively smaller hit and then tie our economic future to trade with the 6.5bn people in rapidly growing economies rather than the 500m people in a stagnant economy.
And the commonwealth wants to trade with the EU more than with a standalone UK
But they still want to trade with both. And we will be easier to make trade deals with (given historical “success” of EU negotiating trade deals). And we are the world’s 5th largest economy. Anyone who does not want to trade with us is shooting themselves in the foot. Why wouldn’t we be near the top of any country’s trading priorities?
My reason for wanting to leave is the conviction that the EU will eventually fall apart. It’s surprising to me that this hasn’t had higher visibility as an issue. When it does eventually happen, I believe things will become very acrimonious – the EU attitude to Brexit gives you a glimpse of this. It may very well end up with people shooting each other but even if not, the economic disruption will be enormous. I want my descendants standing very definitely apart from all that when it happens, and I sincerely hope that a future UK government doesn’t decide to weigh in on one side or the other.
“The leavers do not have a workable plan, never have done. That is the problem.”
Thats because this whole Brexit situation is a case of the ordinary voters vs those in power. There are no Leavers in power other than a few mavericks on both sides who are actually in favour of Brexit. The vast majority of MPs would vote to Remain in a free vote. The Civil Service is against Brexit. Politicians have ignored the anti-EU section of public opinion for decades. It never went away, it got consistently larger, and was consistently ignored, or if noticed called bigoted and racist. Completely accidentally the Rulers forgot all about these people they’d got so used to them not voting or their views being ignored by the parties they voted for. And gave the unvoiced a chance at having a say. And they spoke with unexpected vehemence.
This is the crux of the problem – this is a revolution between the Rulers and the Ruled thats currently happening very slowly and quietly, but its building. If those in power act to thwart the wishes of the people over Brexit then all bets are off in the future. It may not be that Brexit is the catalyst in the future, but the betrayal of a fundamental democratic vote will not be forgotten. Eventually a Trump+++ figure will arise, a real nasty piece of work quite likely, and he will get voted in, precisely because he can say ‘Only I tell the truth, all the others lie to you and ignore you’. And it will be true, at least the latter half.
And all the bien pensants will be aghast at what has happened, completely unaware they have created it with their lies and refusal to to respect the voice of the people.
” I don’t know about Italian banks, but if the government keeps borrowing as they say they will, they are done too. What they are doing to their own finances, you would elsewhere criticise as the inevitable results of socialist excess, envy and greed. Because it’s a eurozone country apparently the euro is at fault.”
Thanks for that BiG. It is reminiscent of the kind of thinking that led to Germany helping to kickstart WW1 – let’s just kick around some of the smaller countries in Europe and try to snap up some more territory.
For a more informed analysis of what is going in, try this https://johnhcochrane.blogspot.com/2018/11/europe.html.
An interesting thing he says:
“Additionally, there is a big kerfuffle going on that Italy’s central bank owes Germany’s a lot of money. Italians see this coming, and there is a lot of capital flight out of Italy. When an Italian writes a check from an Italian bank to buy an apartment in Germany, the money flows from Italian bank to Italian central bank, to German central bank, to German bank. Except the Italian central bank essentially makes a promise to pay rather than actually paying. Italy is basically expanding government debt in this way. I don’t totally understand it, nor did most people I talked to about it, and there is a wide disagreement whether this is another debt or just an accounting glitch. Still, that most people at a financial regulation conference know this is a big problem and nobody is quite sure what it means is telling.”
Remember when German banks were busy lending money to Greece that they must have known would never be repaid? Merkel had to insist that Greece be forced to repay because she could not cope with the thought of telling German voters about the profligacy of German banks. It looks as if German banks are doing more of the same in Italy. Still, it’s nothing to do with Germany is it – it’s all the fault of those pesky Italians.
Italy is entitled to try to borrow itself into oblivion to pay voters to be unproductive. It cannot, however, do that indefinitely in euros any more than it could in dollars, renminbi, bolivars, or North Korean Wong.
Italy is not a small country, is clearly not going to get kicked around, and doesn’t actually have a border with Germany that it would be convenient to send the Panzers across, so you can quit the idiotic hyperbole. If the Italian government defaults on its debt a lot of private investors will lose money, as they did with Greece (no Panzers rolling). My heart bleeds.
Really, the Italian government will be made at some point to stop spending money it cannot repay. There are three options there: (1) voluntarily, (2) some form of technocratic rescue (Greek option*), or (3) the market stops lending suddenly.
Just as with Brexit, there is no milk and honey and unicorn tears option where they carry on regardless without consequence. This is no different to you and me, to any other government, and the euro makes not a blind bit of difference. All the euro does is to spread the pain in a different way. Those German banks would be equally stuffed if the Italians owed Lire or Deutschmarks**.
*Merkel did not insist the Greek government repaid and they did not repay. Greece actually did the largest ever sovereign default in the history of civilisation. We are still alive and WW3 did not break out.
**: I actually agree Germans should spend more and save less. And the Italians do the opposite.
And thanks for the link, muffsniffer. Lots of sense there:
“In my view, monetary union without fiscal union works fine, so long as we all understand that governments can default, and their debt should be treated just as risky (and sometimes junk) corporate debt on bank balance sheets. ”
I have been saying much the same thing for the last 10 years. The government is just A.N. Other-Borrower. It’s only the size of their debts that sets them apart. And those debts should be rather lower than they are. Which, as well as solving the issue permanently, is surely consistent with the arch-libertarian position held by many in these parts, isn’t it?
“The EU, through Barnier, have inflicted upon the UK a major tactical defeat. In doing so I think they have inflicted upon themselves a strategic defeat of Treaty of Versailles proportions”
I’m not quite so sure. Although I still cannot quite believe how all involved have screwed this up right from the get go, I don’t think that the EU has, in this round of negotiations and at least in any sensible sort of timescale, is one of that list.
A non-exhaustive list of epic clusterf*cks might be as follows:
Cameron, pre referendum
– Cameron should have started the process by stating clearly and loudly that, as things stood prior to started the renegotiation, the situation was not in the UK’s long term interests and that he would recommend voting leave. Had he done so, then he might have had some glimmer of a chance to convince the EU that they really needed to take him seriously and subsequently the electorate that whatever he got was an improvement worth voting remain for. He didn’t, so we didn’t believe he ever thought his deal made any difference at all.
The EU, pre referendum
– the EU miscalculated that there would be no downside to calling Cameron’s bluff. They saw that there was a strong undercurrent of dissatisfaction but, whatever, we would never vote leave, so no need to offer anything. At this stage, the fact that they never could offer anything different – because it would run completely counter to the whole point of the EU – was irrelevant. They missed the point that that was in fact the entire point.
Leave campaign
– The Leave campaign never took the moral high ground to make the clear case that, if the EU was just about trade, we wouldn’t be leaving. The idea that remainers were the only ones thinking about their grandchildren (Won’t someone think of the grandchildren!) should have been skewered as tosh from the get go.
Remain campaign
– Project Fear then failed to be straight with anyone about the net cost to us. Whenever they challenged the £350m per week figure and were quizzed on the right number, had to offer “mumble mumble mumble we think it is err…. mumble about £250m per week” at which point they were rightly told to f*ck off. Had they been up front and said: yes, we make net contributions of £250m per week but it’s actually worth it because x, y, z, they could have focussed on a positive message. Every single time I saw a luvvy or other sucker on the teat of cash complaining about funding being withdrawn, I thought either a) EXCELLENT! or b) we are net contributors you moron: we can still pay you and have the net £250m per week.
HMG post referendum
Utterly utterly failed the most basic thing in any negotiation – develop, and possibly publish, your BATNA.
In fact, given the very very very first thing the EU did – to declare that we could not open any trade discussions with anyone else until we had LEFT and to decline to discuss our own deal until we had agreed the divorce bill – we should have stuck two fingers at them, declared we were going full throttle for No Deal, started negotiations with everyone else forthwith and challenged the EU to stop us. We could also have chosen to tell the EU that it is at complete liberty to offer us a deal, but if it slowed us down with our own post brexit planning, it would take a backseat, but that would merely be a nice to have. Leave the EU wanting to talk to us, not the other way round.
Leave commentators post referendum
I haven’t heard anyone make the political philosophy case for leaving. That the direction of travel of the EU is utterly wrong and we really will NOT want to be part of it in 20 years time. Not at all. That the UK was brought in, and particularly kept in in 1975, on a false prospectus that the EU was just a trading relationship. In essence, no-one has provided the principled argument to bolster the leave, even a no deal, position to help give HMG some backbone.
The only really horrible sticking point is the NI border. My view is as per Tim Worstall: tell the EU that it’s their problem not ours. We are perfectly happy to keep a completely open border. If they wish to stick up all the monitoring and clogging and artificial barriers on their side, they’re quite welcome, but don’t blame us.
Barnier has done a solid job of making us uncomfortable as we have not presented any downside to him of doing so. I think it will take some time for the strategic downside of this to come back to bite the EU – as opposed to any of the other member states – and by the time that it does, it may well be in the form of the more existential threats that made me vote leave in the first place…
The NI border is Britain’s problem, because RoI retains freedom of movement. Thus Britain needs the border to stop wogs coming in.
Good stuff, Pedant-General!
Spot on Bardon @1.28pm (and first half of 11.07am). I’ve written before: One of the first ‘red pills’ is realising that ‘democracy’ is not synonymous with ‘liberty’ and might even be antonymous (so argues Plato in his Republic, Book VIII, that tyranny inevitably follows democracy).
No sovereign monarch would have submitted to the then-EEC’s laws being given primacy over our own (ECA 1972 S.2(1) and Flaminio Costa v. E.N.E.L. (1964)).
MJW @1.42pm ‘Hitching ourselves to US special interests’? Too late to worry about that, we’ve been virtually their vassal since 1956. Getting out of the EU—can but hope—might make people realise we need neither the Brussels-Paris-Berlin axis nor Washington pulling our strings.
Seconded, Mal @2.16pm. They ‘can’t take the sky from’ us, eh?
And ver’ good post, Pedant-General @3.39pm.
For an alternative to a Remain Tory Party and Corbyn: the DUP going national and merging with UKIP would have a solid chance of breaking into the mainstream. It would transform UKIP into a party with 10 Westminster MPs (two behind LibDems) in (late?) loose coalition with the Tories; while giving the DUP a foundation of national support to build on. That the DUP are the most successful party in NI (and associated with Tory govt.) should help to tempt high quality candidates to stand nationally. And with the ethnic and cultural connections between Ulster and Scotland along with the ‘Ulsterisation of Scottish Politics’, a national DUP could expect to do well in Scotland at least, strengthening their appearing a serious contender for No.10.
@Mal Reynolds
There are other countries in the world, and most of them see the value of either being in a trade bloc or having some sort of preferential agreement with a trade bloc. But our relationship with the EU is far more deeply integrated, and hard Brexiters really don’t have a plan for dealing with that. Going WTO simply doesn’t tackle all those pesky details. I don’t think 15 years of lower GDP is a price worth paying as these things compound over time. In 15 years time how will our GDP compare to France, an economy and population of similar size to UK?
As for US food safety standards, they are horribly compromised by the agricultural lobby. I’d be perfectly happy with the US selling stuff to us on the basis of EU food standards. If they can compete on that basis then great, but if they’re competitive advantage is based on lowering standards then tough shit. As it stands the US food lobby would never accept higher standards.
Oh come off it. A “national” DUP winning seats in England is only slightly more likely than a “national” Sinn Fein winning seats in England.
Even flirting with the idea of a corby govt is disasterous, all those saying five years of him and then pick up the pieces are deluded. There would be 10 years of unprecedented destruction supported by those bribed with stolen money (confiscatory laws) and those driven by jealousy and class hatred. A corby led regime would leave this country unrecognisable and in such a state no future govt could possibly pick up the pieces. Now I just have to figure out what to do with my family and finances as I will not resign myself to seeing my childrens future destroyed by class war shitheads.
BiG: ‘a “national” Sinn Fein winning seats in England.’ (1) There was a time when Sinn Féin might have hoped to win a constituency here and there in England, although I understand that once famously Irish areas such as Kilburn are now increasingly multicultural or muslim hellholes. (2) Bit of a difference between Sinn Féin and the DUP, Provo-SF being the political wing of terrorists who have bombed England repeatedly and murdered at least 1,726 people with the aim of separating NI from the rest of Britain; while the DUP is a political party whose goal is maintenance of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland. I would not anticipate the latter policy goal being all that unpopular with their English brothers.
Whenever I’ve found excuse to trot out the DUP going national idea, it receives positive feedback from those of a pro-Brexit, pro-Union mindset—and, unsurprisingly, sets the Remainers and other NPCs REEEEEEing, like with BiG above. N.B. one’s enemies never having one’s interests at heart, one rarely goes wrong by doing the opposite of what they advise.
(If nothing else, the announcement of a DUP-UKIP merger would see half the Tory Party have heart attacks on the spot.)
“The NI border is Britain’s problem, because RoI retains freedom of movement. Thus Britain needs the border to stop wogs coming in.”
Good point, but I’m not sure that even then it’s such a big deal:
– The EU is worried about a leaky border with goods going from NI to Eire that it doesn’t want (and for which it wants to charge its exorbitant tariffs).
– We are worried about _people_ going the other way.
Eire is much harder for illegal migrants to get to from inside continental Europe – they aren’t going to take leaky boats from Libya all the way to Ireland. Also it’s not in Schengen.
Different classes of problem. More importantly, the EU really cares about the goods thing. By showing we aren’t too fussed about people going the other way shows this is also not a racist thing about immigration.
Can anybody remind me what supposed to be wrong with US food standards? For what I’ve heard, they’re not exactly dying like flies over there. Unless it’s from overeating it. It’s in the EU countries I seem to recall problems with the quality of food. Wasn’t it the Italians were poisoning themselves with their own olive oil, a few years back?
Or is this the usual Brit intellectual sneer about anything the other side of the Atlantic? Never really got over 1776, some of you.
Bis. I have home both here and California and have done for many years. Incidents of food poisoning in America and food contamination happen on a regular basis plus food in stores is rarely of the standard found here. If you know where to eat and shop its fine.
BIS: There’s nothing wrong with their food standards. US chicken has less salmonella than EU chicken because they chlorinate it. The whole EU ban on it was just an excuse to protect their own chicken producers.
BiG
and as the Pedant-General alludes to
““The NI border is Britain’s problem, because RoI retains freedom of movement. Thus Britain needs the border to stop wogs coming in.””
As neither the RoI nor UK are in Schengen, this is not exactly a zinger. Especially since they have also had a common travel area with the UK for almost a 100 years.
On the food issue; it’s protectionist bollocks with a snobbish justification. Does no one recall horsemeat burgers, poisonous Spanish rapeseed oil, Austrian anti-freeze wine, Italian non-olive olive oil, etc, etc?
N@pedantgeneral. Spot on. I’ve discussed this at work and made clear my view that the negligence of the government is unforgivable. A couple of colleagues, hard core remainers, are of the same opinion. This is scandalous.
“Utterly utterly failed the most basic thing in any negotiation – develop, and possibly publish, your BATNA.”
Depends what May’s objective was. If it was to buy some time and scupper Brexit then focusing on her opponents BATNA which is all that her British subjects ever got, by a country mile, then maybe she played her hand with the utmost of skill.
Look at this thread for a snapshot of the British Brexit folly of paralysis by analysis, no fighting them on the beaches, for a nation of shopkeepers it’s pretty sad that they didn’t just keep opening the shop up and selling their wares. Preferring instead to squabble amongst themselves about the pros and cons of the new look euro labelling.
May and her opponent had the same objective and therefore the same BATNA. She played and still is playing her people like a grand piano.
For a brief moment there I thought that the lion was about to awaken from its slumber and roar once more, but it wasn’t to be and fool Britannia shall remain.
History rhymes.
“Don’t dictate to us until you are marching down Whitehall. And even then, we won’t listen!”
A marvellous line from a rather relevant film.
Vidkun Quisling also claimed to be doing what he thought best for his country. Didn’t do him much good.
Bardon
“Depends what May’s objective was.”
You can infer her objective from her outcomes and actions.
Was it possible for her to have made any more of a mess than she did, most likely no, so therefore her objective was to make a complete and utter shambles of Brexit. She has done well.
You can just imagine the conversation amongst the lords and the ladies over this weekend during the Brexit congratulatory meetings that will be held across many stately homes.
Much scoffing and chortling as they retire from the croquet lawn and sip on fine Champagne. “Theresa was such a cad, that much so that she somehow managed to persuade Manchester cotton spinners that they should be concerned about the relative ease that an oxen cart can come and go from our Usltern plantations, …………….. jolly spiffing show.”
14 November Draft Agreement on the withdrawal of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland from the European Union and the European Atomic Energy Community
PDF, 1.37MB, 585 pages
Discussion & Analysis:
http://www.bishop-hill.net/unthreaded starts at post:
Nov 14, 2018 at 8:04 PM | Registered Commenter Pcar
currently Page 5
@M Courtney, waded through it and found some real stinkers
eg Article 4 Point 5