Brexit process

[Potemkin Villager]

The 'solution' to the Irish border is to remain in the single market and the customs union,

That solves one problem only to replace it with an even bigger one, namely a complete meltdown in British politics. It solves "the Irish problem" but creates a much bigger "European problem" because we'll end up back in the situation that led to the referendum in the first place, except squared.

There is such splendid generosity of spirit here with the UK as keen as mustard to make their numerous problems, even greater problems and everybody elses problems as well. This is such a fantastic cutting edge way of making friends and influencing folk.

The blessed Teresa is expecting a green light on Monday to press on regardless. Without divine intervention there are two hopes of this, Bob Hope and no hope.

[Little John]

There is only one solution and that is to enact the democratic result of the referendum. All of the problems outlined are problems that have arisen explicitly as a function of EU membership.

Regarding the specific issue of an Irish border:

If Ireland wishes to remain part of the EU, then there are costs attached to that in terms of border controls - just as there will be costs on the UK's side of that border. Nobody is forcing Ireland to be in or out of the EU. It's their choice.

If the EU plays ball with the UK and Ireland on the border question, then that is all to the good for Ireland and I wish them well. But, it the EU does not play ball, then Ireland needs to take it up with their political masters in the EU, not the UK.

[johnhemming2]

Ireland has a veto on the deal.

[adam2]

I do not see how the Irish republic can veto any deal, they have no more rights in this matter than other members of the EU.
Northern Ireland might appear in effect have a veto, in that the present minority conservative government are reliant on the support of DUP MPs.

If however the DUP voted against Brexit, then the legislation to leave the EU would IMHO probably still be passed.

It would need only a small number of other opposition MPs to vote with the government for the bill to pass. The Labour party have said (reluctantly I suspect) that they accept the referendum result and the will of the people.
And remember that only a fairly small number of Labour MPs need to vote with the government, not a majority of them.

[UndercoverElephant]

I do not see how the Irish republic can veto any deal, they have no more rights in this matter than other members of the EU.

All 27 EU members have a veto on talks moving on to phase 2 (trade deal). The irony is that of all 27, it is Ireland who has the most to lose if there is no deal, so it has a veto, but there is a huge cost to itself if it actually uses it.

Northern Ireland might appear in effect have a veto, in that the present minority conservative government are reliant on the support of DUP MPs.

They're in a similar situation though - if they use their "veto" to bring down TM's government, they risk ending up with Corbyn instead, and Corbyn will happily sell them down the river.

If however the DUP voted against Brexit, then the legislation to leave the EU would IMHO probably still be passed.

They could force a vote of no confidence, and even threatening to do so would force TM to do pretty much whatever they demand, or resign.

[Potemkin Villager]

I will reiterate, indeed as folk on this forum are keen on doing, I will make a prediction. The blessed Teresa is expecting a green light on Monday to press on regardless. Without divine intervention there are two hopes of this, Bob Hope and no hope.

https://youtu.be/cjRE9YlMmnM

[UndercoverElephant]

I will reiterate, indeed as folk on this forum are keen on doing, I will make a prediction. The blessed Teresa is expecting a green light on Monday to press on regardless. Without divine intervention there are two hopes of this, Bob Hope and no hope.

https://youtu.be/cjRE9YlMmnM

She knows there will be no green light:

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles ... t-progress

Looks to me like the whole process is now doomed:

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/20 ... ks-says-eu

Ireland will have final say on progress of Brexit talks, says EU

Donald Tusk says that if Ireland cannot accept UK offer for its border, EU will not allow negotiations to move on to trade


Ireland will have the final say on whether the UK has made sufficient progress in Brexit negotiations to move on to the next stage, the president of the European council, Donald Tusk, has said.

After an hour-long meeting with Leo Varadkar in Dublin, Tusk said he had agreed that the taoiseach would be consulted fully before the guidelines for negotiations on Brexit transition arrangements would be circulated among the 27 member states.

Ireland, which is looking for written commitment that there will be no return to a hard border with Northern Ireland, has threatened to veto progress if Britain does not come up with a satisfactory and concrete offer this weekend.

“Let me say very clearly: if the UK offer is unacceptable for Ireland, it will also be unacceptable for the EU. I realise that for some British politicians this may be hard to understand,� said Tusk. “But such is the logic behind the fact that Ireland is the EU member while the UK is leaving

British and European Brexit task force officials are having “intense discussions� on how to reconcile the desire by all parties not to have a hard border with the legal requirement to have customs border checks once the UK departs the bloc.

There is no indication yet of a text that would be agreeable to the Irish, and Varadkar warned again on Friday that Ireland was prepared to prevent talks moving forward.

“We have to ensure we avoid the risk by any regulatory divergence,� he said.

The EU/Ireland is demanding the impossible. They are demanding that either the UK doesn't leave the customs union and single market (in which case there's no point in leaving the EU at all) or that Northern Ireland remains in the customs union, resulting in an internal hard border within the UK, which is (understandably) completely impossible politically within the UK. It is also demanding that the UK commits to this before the EU enters into trade negotiations. There is nothing Theresa May can do to fix this - she is facing demands that the EU knows perfectly well are impossible to fulfil, even if there was the political will to do so.

It isn't a matter of time, either. She could have all the time in the world, and she still wouldn't be able to square this circle. She now has to walk away. She has to take the money back off the table and say the UK is walking away, and prepare to trade under WTO rules.

[johnhemming2]

I do not see how the Irish republic can veto any deal,

The eu countries have to be unanimous so any of them can veto a deal

[clv101]

She now has to walk away. She has to take the money back off the table and say the UK is walking away, and prepare to trade under WTO rules.

Or... our existence outside the EU will involve continued membership of the customs union and single market. It is simply not true for you to say she has to walk away.

I see that as a far more likely outcome than walking away. Of course it would only be described as a temporary, transitional arrangement... but in reality could end up lasting for a long time.

[UndercoverElephant]

She now has to walk away. She has to take the money back off the table and say the UK is walking away, and prepare to trade under WTO rules.

Or... our existence outside the EU will involve continued membership of the customs union and single market. It is simply not true for you to say she has to walk away.

There is absolutely no point in remaining in the CU and SM if we leave the EU. If we are going to stay in the CU and the SM then we have to have a say in the future decisions that govern them. Anything else is pure insanity, because it just invites the EU to shaft us over and over and over again.

Also, this outcome is so politically toxic within the tory party that her own MPs will get rid of her if she tried to go down this path. She has been crystal clear from the start that Brexit means leaving the SM and the CU.

I see that as a far more likely outcome than walking away. Of course it would only be described as a temporary, transitional arrangement... but in reality could end up lasting for a long time.

That outcome would be a total disaster, and viewed by almost everybody as exactly that.

[Potemkin Villager]

She has to take the money back off the table and say the UK is walking away, and prepare to trade under WTO rules.

Well maybe so but there would still remain the land frontier problem.

"Taking control of our frontiers" is a flawed sound bite because frontiers are shared and not the exclusive property of one party, whatever that party might arrogantly think.

If she does do this the outcomes are very uncertain and the scope for legal and bureaucratic mischief making increases hugely. It might be salutatory just to consider exactly what real friends and allies abroad the UK actually has and how all this is alienating them.

[UndercoverElephant]

She has to take the money back off the table and say the UK is walking away, and prepare to trade under WTO rules.

Well maybe so but there would still remain the land frontier problem.

That's not a problem for the UK. It is a problem for Ireland.

"Taking control of our frontiers" is a flawed sound bite because frontiers are shared and not the exclusive property of one party, whatever that party might arrogantly think.

Each side owns their own side.

If she does do this the outcomes are very uncertain and the scope for legal and bureaucratic mischief making increases hugely. It might be salutatory just to consider exactly what real friends and allies abroad the UK actually has and how all this is alienating them.

She can consider all she likes, it won't change what is politically possible for her. She has very limited room for maneuver. She can only do what can't or won't be torpedoed by her own MPs, the DUP, the EU or the Irish.

She could turn around and say "OK, we have to stay in the customs union", but she'd be gone by tomorrow.

[clv101]

She now has to walk away. She has to take the money back off the table and say the UK is walking away, and prepare to trade under WTO rules.

Or... our existence outside the EU will involve continued membership of the customs union and single market. It is simply not true for you to say she has to walk away.

There is absolutely no point in remaining in the CU and SM if we leave the EU. If we are going to stay in the CU and the SM then we have to have a say in the future decisions that govern them. Anything else is pure insanity, because it just invites the EU to shaft us over and over and over again.

Also, this outcome is so politically toxic within the tory party that her own MPs will get rid of her if she tried to go down this path. She has been crystal clear from the start that Brexit means leaving the SM and the CU.

I see that as a far more likely outcome than walking away. Of course it would only be described as a temporary, transitional arrangement... but in reality could end up lasting for a long time.

That outcome would be a total disaster, and viewed by almost everybody as exactly that.

I agree with you. But, the alternative would also be a disaster. My point is that there are still options (no good ones admittedly), but there are still options right along the spectrum from retracting Artical 50 ... a Norway model ... or walking away.

It's not true to say she now has to walk away and I think it's pretty unlikely she will.

As an aside, it's going to be fascinating to find out over the next few years what actually happens!

[adam2]

Remaining in the customs union and in the single market, would be seen by many as remaining in the EU, in all but name.
It would certainly be a splendid way for the establishment to override the referendum result and remain "nearly in" whilst saying "we have left as the people demanded"

Presumably under such circumstances we would still have to pay perhaps £50 billion (reduced from some larger but unspecified figure) as an exit fee for "sort off" leaving, but would also have to pay a large annual fee (probably bigger than we pay now) in order to remain in the customs union and the single market.

I think that we should leave, fully and completely, the EU and all parts thereof.
We should of course pay any monies owing, but it would be reasonable to delay such payments until the EU have had their accounts audited, and all remaining members have agreed the accounts.

I think that the EU will collapse, so the sooner we get out the better.

[clv101]

She can consider all she likes, it won't change what is politically possible for her. She has very limited room for maneuver. She can only do what can't or won't be torpedoed by her own MPs, the DUP, the EU or the Irish.

She could turn around and say "OK, we have to stay in the customs union", but she'd be gone by tomorrow.

This discussion shouldn't be bound by what's politically possible for TM this week. I think it's perfectly likely the current administration will collapse before March 2019. What/who replaces it is anyone's guess.