Brexit process

[Little John]

Anyone who believe in nation statehood must be a blithering, jingoistic fool at best or a knuckle dragging moron at worst...right?

Wrong. The country was split approx. 50/50 and remains so. Both sides have perfectly valid arguments. Both sides need to respect the opposite point of view.

It's too early yet, but at some point we'll have to go through a 'healing' process, both within the UK and in the future UK/EU relationship....

Smug, sanctimonious, self-satisfied, supercilious, sneering and, worst of all, anti-democratic jokers on the remain side have made that all but impossible.

[Mark]

Anyone who believe in nation statehood must be a blithering, jingoistic fool at best or a knuckle dragging moron at worst...right?

Wrong. The country was split approx. 50/50 and remains so. Both sides have perfectly valid arguments. Both sides need to respect the opposite point of view.

It's too early yet, but at some point we'll have to go through a 'healing' process, both within the UK and in the future UK/EU relationship....

Smug, sanctimonious, self-satisfied, supercilious, sneering and, worst of all, anti-democratic jokers on the remain side have made that all but impossible.

And the Brexit side is any better ?
For example, try re-reading your last 20/30/40 posts.... !!!

It's a divorce. We're going through the difficult bit at the moment where we're dividing the house, car, record collection etc.....
Once it's all done, we'll still need to talk to each other about the kids etc...
We're not going to war - infact we'll very much need the EU as allies....

[Little John]

Wrong. The country was split approx. 50/50 and remains so. Both sides have perfectly valid arguments. Both sides need to respect the opposite point of view.

It's too early yet, but at some point we'll have to go through a 'healing' process, both within the UK and in the future UK/EU relationship....

Smug, sanctimonious, self-satisfied, supercilious, sneering and, worst of all, anti-democratic jokers on the remain side have made that all but impossible.

And the Brexit side is any better ?
For example, try re-reading your last 20/30/40 posts.... !!!

It's a divorce. We're going through the difficult bit at the moment where we're dividing the house, car, record collection etc.....
Once it's all done, we'll still need to talk to each other about the kids etc...
We're not going to war - infact we'll very much need the EU as allies....

Every single one of my posts on this topic has been in response to precisely that which I mentioned and that which you have just amply displayed. Well done.

[Mark]

Remember, CEFIC, CIA, ENDSREPORT.

All private companies selling compliance services.

Really ??
The CIA is a membership organisation, funded by its members to represent their interests...., their main interest is in a healthy UK Chemical Sector
CEFIC is the European version - not sure on the exact structure, but think it's fairly similar.
ENDS Report is an environmental newsfeed/magazine, paid for by those who subscribe and/or advertise. Personally, I find their articles excellently researched and very detailed.

You really will have to start referencing some of your assertions over the past few pages.....
Or you might start losing credibility....

[Lord Beria3]

Not a solution to the Brexit impasse, but a first step

FAZ has a Brexit scoop this morning. The European Commission is ready to offer the UK an extension of the transitional period, which under a previous draft agreement would have ended in December 2020. This is an important concession and solves the problem of the two transitional periods that would have been necessary - this one, plus the period in a customs union until the FTA takes effect. But the offer does not address the hairy issue of the Irish backstop: what happens if there is no FTA by the end of that period.

FAZ sources its story from an internal document circulating after the breakdown of the talks on Sunday. The article - and we presume the document - does not mention any specific dates, but we would assume that the natural end date would be December 2021, just ahead of the next UK elections. This is still a tight timetable for an FTA - though not necessarily for an FTA that starts out from a situation where the two parties have already converged. 

The paper raises more questions than it answers. For example, it says the UK insisted on a permanent inclusion of the country in the customs union if no FTA is negotiated. This seems to contradict Theresa May’s statement in the House of Commons that the UK would not be a permanent member of a customs union. The document said the Commission was, at this stage, not ready to offer the UK permanent membership of a customs union as part of the withdrawal treaty itself. 

Today’s European Council is unlikely to make much progress. The main goal is to avoid another diplomatic disaster as in Salzburg. We don’t see a Brexit deal concluded until December at the earliest - a timetable that would also greatly help passage of a withdrawal deal in the House of Commons. We also believe that the EU should then make a statement that the deal is final - making clear that it will not renegotiate if the deal is rejected, or accept an extension to the Brexit process. It is essential for passage of the agreement that the EU eliminates doubt among UK MPs about the availability of alternatives.

We note a column by Daniel Finkelstein, the Times columnist, who recently reflected about why a second referendum may be attractive to May herself. He now seems to have shifted his views on this matter, and says that May’s position is stronger than it appears with regards to the House of Commons. A no-deal scenario would indeed open up the possibility of a second referendum or a general election, both unpalatable options for the Brexiteers. And they cannot get rid of May because they don’t have sufficient votes.

So, once it became clear that there would not be a general election after a failed deal (if, for example, the DUP stays on board), would the Labour Party really oppose it? After all, their whole rationale for rejecting the deal is to force elections.

[stumuz1]

Remember, CEFIC, CIA, ENDSREPORT.

All private companies selling compliance services.

Really ??
The CIA is a membership organisation, funded by its members to represent their interests...., their main interest is in a healthy UK Chemical Sector
CEFIC is the European version - not sure on the exact structure, but think it's fairly similar.
ENDS Report is an environmental newsfeed/magazine, paid for by those who subscribe and/or advertise. Personally, I find their articles excellently researched and very detailed.

You really will have to start referencing some of your assertions over the past few pages.....
Or you might start losing credibility....

CIA selling a conference Nov 15 at the Grosvenor, Park Lane, London.

'Brexit and Growth of the UK Chemical Industry' a snip at £400 per person!

You going?

[kenneal - lagger]

........Wrong. The country was split approx. 50/50 and remains so. Both sides have perfectly valid arguments. Both sides need to respect the opposite point of view.

It's too early yet, but at some point we'll have to go through a 'healing' process, both within the UK and in the future UK/EU relationship....

The country was split 48 to 52 in favour of leaving with another bunch who were so enthused by the whole project that they couldn't be bothered to think about it and vote. Who know which way they might have gone?

It would be nice if Remainers respected the Brexitiers point of view instead of calling us everything from racist to stupid including liars on the way. The worst thing that I have said about Remainers is that they are hypocrites for trying to con us into having a "People's Vote" again on the basis that we didn't have a "People's Vote" the first time around.

So can we have some respect for the Brexit point of view please?

[Mark]

CIA selling a conference Nov 15 at the Grosvenor, Park Lane, London.

'Brexit and Growth of the UK Chemical Industry' a snip at £400 per person!

You going?

As we don't know what type of Brexit we'll end up with, it can only be guesswork - IMO not worth it.....
Might have a look at the Agenda out of interest though....
Maybe they'll predict a massive increase for chemical regulatory services and a shrinkage of manufacturing.....

[Little John]

Not a solution to the Brexit impasse, but a first step

FAZ has a Brexit scoop this morning. The European Commission is ready to offer the UK an extension of the transitional period, which under a previous draft agreement would have ended in December 2020. This is an important concession and solves the problem of the two transitional periods that would have been necessary - this one, plus the period in a customs union until the FTA takes effect.....

In what way is that a "concession" and in what way does it "solve" anything?

It means we stay in the EU with all of the issues about the EU, that caused people to voite to leave, still pertaining.

There are only and have only ever been a limited number of solutions and they have been known form the start.

a) leave with a free trade deal that does not involve sacrificing the sovereignty of our judiciary, legislature or borders.

b) leave without a deal and trade on WTO rules

c) don't leave

(a) is preferable, (b) is doable if necessary and (c) is not available. Or, at least, not unless we wish to see civil insurrection and/or a major realignment of British politics.

Our political class, however, are hoping they can grind the people down to the point where they will accept (c)

Not going to happen.

[Mark]

........Wrong. The country was split approx. 50/50 and remains so. Both sides have perfectly valid arguments. Both sides need to respect the opposite point of view.

It's too early yet, but at some point we'll have to go through a 'healing' process, both within the UK and in the future UK/EU relationship....

The country was split 48 to 52 in favour of leaving with another bunch who were so enthused by the whole project that they couldn't be bothered to think about it and vote. Who know which way they might have gone?

It would be nice if Remainers respected the Brexitiers point of view instead of calling us everything from racist to stupid including liars on the way. The worst thing that I have said about Remainers is that they are hypocrites for trying to con us into having a "People's Vote" again on the basis that we didn't have a "People's Vote" the first time around.

So can we have some respect for the Brexit point of view please?

If you re-read my post, I said that BOTH sides need to respect the opposite point of view...
I haven't said which way I voted, or indeed whether I was part of the 'other bunch' that didn't vote....

What I have said, is that as I understand the implications of a No Deal Brexit better, I now believe that it would have a massive adverse impact on UK Manufacturing.
Some here might think that is a reasonable price to pay to regain sovereignty....
I haven't commented on that aspect.

[stumuz1]

I now believe that it would have a massive adverse impact on UK Manufacturing.

Thanks for the very clear opinion.

Just for the avoidance of doubt. You also believe that Brexit will never be advantageous for manufacturing. Brexit can only be bad for manufacturing?

[Lord Beria3]

Little John - agree with you, the extension of the transition doesn't change anything. Disagree with Eurointelligence on that one.

Basically there are 3 options left:

1) Britain accepts backstop and approves deal

2) EU drops backstop insistance, paving the way for a deal

3) Neither side moves from their red lines and its a no-deal Brexit

Not sure there is much to add now. EU are assuming May will blink and May appears to assume the EU will soften their position at the 11th hour.

That was why, instead of discussing Brexit, Macron and Merkel got pissed in central Brussels.

[Lord Beria3]

Eurointelligence latest briefing...

https://www.eurointelligence.com/public.html

Disorder, disorder....
We had originally planned to spare you the details of arcane UK parliamentary procedures for the ratification of a Brexit withdrawal deal, because we believe that those procedures will never be triggered. We still think that. But, as we follow the UK debate, we realise that they might matter for a different reason. The rules might give MPs a mistaken incentive to reject a withdrawal deal.

The issue came to light in the context of a bullying scandal involving the speaker of the House of Commons, John Bercow. The formerly bewigged Speaker is not only the master of ceremonies but has the right to decide what parliamentary amendments are deemed admissible and which are not. After the rejection of the so-called meaningful vote amendment, the Speaker now has the right to decide whether the House could vote to take matters in its own hand if there is no deal by January. In extremis, this could involve the House calling on the government to ask for an extension of the Article 50 deadline to allow for a second referendum.

In the more likely event of a deal, the issue involving parliamentary procedures is going to be a different one. It is about whether, when, and to which extent parliament has the right to pass amendments to the withdrawal treaty. Dominic Raab, Brexit secretary, yesterday sent a letter to MPs outlining the government’s preference for a more streamlined ratification process. But in the end, it is Mr Speaker who will be in charge. Never underestimate the tendency of imperial overreach in the House of Commons.

There are amendments that could invalidate the treaty, and whose passage would constitute outright non-ratification. This includes an amendment to subject passage to a future referendum, because this could only happen if the European Council were to agree to an extension of the Article 50 deadline. When Brits discuss the second referendum or alternative deals, they always tend to take the EU’s position for granted.

We doubt very much that the EU would be much impressed in an open-ended referendum process, especially one forced upon it by a reluctant UK government. The timetable of Article 50 and the unanimity requirement for an extension are the reasons why we think the UK parliament is ultimately facing a binary choice - between accepting a deal or a no-deal Brexit. The talk about parliamentary procedures serves mainly to prop up the egos of dejected MPs, but in reality constitute a diversion. Those who hyperventilate have either not read, or failed to comprehend, Article 50, or if they do, they misjudge the interests of the EU.

In this context, we noted a comment by Fabian Zuleeg. He writes the EU would of course welcome a decision by the UK to reverse Brexit. Whether this is legally possible is another, as yet untested issue. For the sake of argument let us assume that it is.

But this would have to be the result of a genuine change of heart - not an opinion poll. He said it is unlikely this will happen inside the remaining time. He writes that from the perspective of the EU27, the option of a Brexit reversal has disappeared from the radar screen.

The speaker of the House may get away bullying his staff, but he has no means at his disposal to bully the EU.

[Mark]

I now believe that it would have a massive adverse impact on UK Manufacturing.

Thanks for the very clear opinion.

Just for the avoidance of doubt. You also believe that Brexit will never be advantageous for manufacturing. Brexit can only be bad for manufacturing?

Firstly, there's a big difference between 'Deal' Brexit and 'No Deal' Brexit and we still don't know which one we're getting.....
My opinions/comments have all referred to a 'No Deal' Brexit.

Off the top of my head:
Chemicals - already discussed above - I think that REACh will be a far bigger issue/problem than you seem to
Pharmaceuticals - they'll struggle with even worse legislative disruption
Automotive - their supply chains are totally interwoven with the EU. Just-In-Time would soon become Just-Too-Late. Several Car Plants are already a cloud (eg Ellesmere Port)
Aerospace - again, totally interwoven with the EU - Airbus, Eurofighter etc.
Also, many US, Japanese, Chinese companies have manufacturing bases here to allow them access to the EU - some would look to relocate, future investment would go elsewhere....

Obviously, it wouldn't all be bad - I'm sure there would be winners too, but I'm struggling to see who they would be at the moment....
Any suggestions ?

[Potemkin Villager]

Yes I often wonder who it is exactly would benefit from no deal and why exactly it is energetically promoted as being better than a "bad" deal.