Brexit process

Discussion of the latest Peak Oil news (please also check the Website News area below)

Moderator: Peak Moderation

Locked
User avatar
Lord Beria3
Posts: 5066
Joined: 25 Feb 2009, 20:57
Location: Moscow Russia
Contact:

Post by Lord Beria3 »

By 43 percent to 37 percent, participants also said they are prepared to walk away without a deal if the EU will not strike a “reasonable� agreement, rather than trying to avoid a “no-deal� exit at all costs.
https://www.politico.eu/article/poll-bo ... exit-deal/

Well this poll backs up my anecdotal evidence that the "man on the street" would rather Britain go it alone, e.g. no-deal, rather then accept an unreasonable deal.

Regarding the prospect of a no-deal, I think it is more likely then not, but a few caveats...

1) as Eurointelligence notes, EU leaders don't take the threat of no-deal seriously. They all assume, to a man, that Britain will back down at the last minute. The possibility that Britain might rather have a no-deal exit is beyond their comprehension.

The reason I think a deal is still on the cards is that once the EU, at the last minute, realise that Britain isn't going to sign up to a Irish backstop which breaks up the Union (May's only real red line) they may soften their position and find a technical fudge on the Irish border, in line with existing solutions.

Of course, the Irish will hate it, but I suppose the question is whether the Irish border is worth destroying any possibility of a Brexit deal with the UK. Ultimately a call for Macron and Merkel as they de facto lead the EU27.

2) a blind Brexit is still a possibility with the most contentious issues kicked down the can. I think it is a diminishing possibility but not yet to be ruled out.

My own view is that a no-deal Brexit is marginally the most likely outcome but with a Canada style hard Brexit deal or a Chequers minus blind Brexit coming close behind.

p.s. my definition of a no-deal Brexit would include mini-deals to avoid the worst case disruption. As Euro intelligence notes in a recent briefing it is not realistic to think that the EU member-states will allow planes, euro-tunnel and other basic issues to be grounded on April 1st 2019. It is in everybody interests to ensure a smoothest possible no-deal outcome, if negotiations collapse.
Peace always has been and always will be an intermittent flash of light in a dark history of warfare, violence, and destruction
User avatar
clv101
Site Admin
Posts: 10551
Joined: 24 Nov 2005, 11:09
Contact:

Post by clv101 »

How do you two differentiate between no-deal and bare-bones? For me no-deal is hard to comprehend which is why I think bare-bones (covering aviation, medicine, some agriculture products, some insurance and financial services etc...) agreed (if only temporarily, hence can-kicking) in the final weeks is more likely.
fuzzy
Posts: 1388
Joined: 29 Nov 2013, 15:08
Location: The Marches, UK

Post by fuzzy »

As I said before, it's interesting that the obvious option of allowing the NI [who overwhelmingly voted to continue sucking on the EU teat] to vote on unification with Eire, seems to be always avoided by the UK gov. Too much secret money about.
User avatar
UndercoverElephant
Posts: 13497
Joined: 10 Mar 2008, 00:00
Location: UK

Post by UndercoverElephant »

fuzzy wrote:As I said before, it's interesting that the obvious option of allowing the NI [who overwhelmingly voted to continue sucking on the EU teat] to vote on unification with Eire, seems to be always avoided by the UK gov. Too much secret money about.
It's coming.
User avatar
Catweazle
Posts: 3388
Joined: 17 Feb 2008, 12:04
Location: Petite Bourgeois, over the hills

Post by Catweazle »

Tories have Boris "not ruling out" leadership challenge to intimidate Brussels, but Eurocrats are not going to fall for that. I think brinksmanship to the very end will lead to a hard Brexit.
User avatar
Lord Beria3
Posts: 5066
Joined: 25 Feb 2009, 20:57
Location: Moscow Russia
Contact:

Post by Lord Beria3 »

clv101 wrote:How do you two differentiate between no-deal and bare-bones? For me no-deal is hard to comprehend which is why I think bare-bones (covering aviation, medicine, some agriculture products, some insurance and financial services etc...) agreed (if only temporarily, hence can-kicking) in the final weeks is more likely.
To me they are the same thing.

No withdrawal treaty (so no big deal) but mini deals to preserve basic relations.

Regarding northern Ireland only a slim majority voted for remain (55 per cent).

There would be significant opposition from the unionists to join eire and it would likely lead to violent unrest and terrorism. That's why the UK wants to avoid it! It would bring back the troubles!
Peace always has been and always will be an intermittent flash of light in a dark history of warfare, violence, and destruction
User avatar
PS_RalphW
Posts: 6978
Joined: 24 Nov 2005, 11:09
Location: Cambridge

Post by PS_RalphW »

55 percent is bigger than the UK majority to leave.
User avatar
Lord Beria3
Posts: 5066
Joined: 25 Feb 2009, 20:57
Location: Moscow Russia
Contact:

Post by Lord Beria3 »

But not overwhelming!
Peace always has been and always will be an intermittent flash of light in a dark history of warfare, violence, and destruction
User avatar
clv101
Site Admin
Posts: 10551
Joined: 24 Nov 2005, 11:09
Contact:

Post by clv101 »

Lord Beria3 wrote:To me they are the same thing.
Okay, that's a big thing. To me no-deal means no-deal (which is incomprehensible). There will be a deal - the discussion should be over the scope of such a deal.

...but the fact that even such basic terminology hasn't been pinned down with just six months to go is a farce.
User avatar
Potemkin Villager
Posts: 1960
Joined: 14 Mar 2006, 10:58
Location: Narnia

Post by Potemkin Villager »

Yes everything seems to be going splendidly!
Overconfidence, not just expert overconfidence but general overconfidence,
is one of the most common illusions we experience. Stan Robinson
User avatar
UndercoverElephant
Posts: 13497
Joined: 10 Mar 2008, 00:00
Location: UK

Post by UndercoverElephant »

clv101 wrote:
Lord Beria3 wrote:To me they are the same thing.
Okay, that's a big thing. To me no-deal means no-deal (which is incomprehensible). There will be a deal - the discussion should be over the scope of such a deal.

...but the fact that even such basic terminology hasn't been pinned down with just six months to go is a farce.
"No deal" ought to me "no withdrawal deal", which implies no trade deal either.

A minimal deal to keep planes in the air and the lights on in NI isn't what people mean by "the UK leaving with a deal".

Although the way things are going, I am beginning to wonder if even those minimal deals are going to done. The EU still appears convinced that the UK is going to blink, and I am fairly certain it is not going to happen. We will find out by January.
User avatar
Potemkin Villager
Posts: 1960
Joined: 14 Mar 2006, 10:58
Location: Narnia

Post by Potemkin Villager »

It's almost as if things are being pushed along in such a way because some folk stand to benefit hugely from the whole thing going tits up.
Overconfidence, not just expert overconfidence but general overconfidence,
is one of the most common illusions we experience. Stan Robinson
User avatar
Lord Beria3
Posts: 5066
Joined: 25 Feb 2009, 20:57
Location: Moscow Russia
Contact:

Post by Lord Beria3 »

And who would these 'people' be?
Peace always has been and always will be an intermittent flash of light in a dark history of warfare, violence, and destruction
User avatar
Potemkin Villager
Posts: 1960
Joined: 14 Mar 2006, 10:58
Location: Narnia

Post by Potemkin Villager »

Lord Beria3 wrote:And who would these 'people' be?
Well that is a very good question indeed. Thanks for showing some interest.

I really don't know but there is so much gone wrong with the negotiations it all cannot be down to incompetence. There are plenty of the usual suspects. Sections of the city of London and murky offshore financial vehicles betting on the impact of a crash out. Various current and historical imperial rivals maybe.

Perhaps others have some ideas.

There was some stuff on GCHQ targeting Belgium telecom, and hence the EU institutions, so if various national spook organisations are up to their necks in this, which is likely, all bets are off.
Overconfidence, not just expert overconfidence but general overconfidence,
is one of the most common illusions we experience. Stan Robinson
vtsnowedin
Posts: 6595
Joined: 07 Jan 2011, 22:14
Location: New England ,Chelsea Vermont

Post by vtsnowedin »

I would look to the bureaucrats that serve as a link between the UK and the rest of the EU as their very jobs are on the line and then to the Bankers and industrialists that will lose business opportunities and cash flow following a hard Brexit. You very own "deep State" and" Military -Industrial complex".
Locked