Brexit process

[Little John]

It is clear that the political class made a strategic mistake with the referendum and the whole of the last two years has been a process of them wresting back control form the people. That process is now almost complete.

But, mark my words. If this comes to pass, the unspoken contract between those who rule and those who are ruled will have been irrevocably broken. Things will not be the same now. This is about more than merely Brexit. It always was. Things are going to turn ugly in the years to come.

There will, at some point, be bloodshed over this.

[Little John]

Aussie (ex PM) Tony Abbott sums it up. Accurately, in my view.

It’s pretty hard for Britain’s friends, here in Australia, to make sense of the mess that’s being made of Brexit. The referendum result was perhaps the biggest-ever vote of confidence in the United Kingdom, its past and its future. But the British establishment doesn’t seem to share that confidence and instead looks desperate to cut a deal, even if that means staying under the rule of Brussels. Looking at this from abroad, it’s baffling: the country that did the most to bring democracy into the modern world might yet throw away the chance to take charge of its own destiny.

Let’s get one thing straight: a negotiation that you’re not prepared to walk away from is not a negotiation — it’s surrender. It’s all give and no get. When David Cameron tried to renegotiate Britain’s EU membership, he was sent packing because Brussels judged (rightly) that he’d never actually back leaving. And since then, Brussels has made no real concessions to Theresa May because it judges (rightly, it seems) that she’s desperate for whatever deal she can get.

The EU’s palpable desire to punish Britain for leaving vindicates the Brexit project. Its position, now, is that there’s only one ‘deal’ on offer, whereby the UK retains all of the burdens of EU membership but with no say in setting the rules. The EU seems to think that Britain will go along with this because it’s terrified of no deal. Or, to put it another way, terrified of the prospect of its own independence.

But even after two years of fearmongering and vacillation, it’s not too late for robust leadership to deliver the Brexit that people voted for. It’s time for Britain to announce what it will do if the EU can’t make an acceptable offer by March 29 next year — and how it would handle no deal. Freed from EU rules, Britain would automatically revert to world trade, using rules agreed by the World Trade Organization. It works pretty well for Australia. So why on earth would it not work just as well for the world’s fifth-largest economy?

A world trade Brexit lets Britain set its own rules. It can say, right now, that it will not impose any tariff or quota on European produce and would recognise all EU product standards. That means no border controls for goods coming from Europe to Britain. You don’t need to negotiate this: just do it. If Europe knows what’s in its own best interests, it would fully reciprocate in order to maintain entirely free trade and full mutual recognition of standards right across Europe.

Next, the UK should declare that Europeans already living here should have the right to remain permanently — and, of course, become British citizens if they wish. This should be a unilateral offer. Again, you don’t need a deal. You don’t need Michel Barnier’s permission. If Europe knows what’s best for itself, it would likewise allow Britons to stay where they are.

Third, there should continue to be free movement of people from Europe into Britain — but with a few conditions. Only for work, not welfare. And with a foreign worker’s tax on the employer, to make sure anyone coming in would not be displacing British workers.

Fourth, no ‘divorce bill’ whatsoever should be paid to Brussels. The UK government would assume the EU’s property and liabilities in Britain, and the EU would assume Britain’s share of these in Europe. If Britain was getting its fair share, these would balance out; and if Britain wasn’t getting its fair share, it’s the EU that should be paying Britain.

Finally, there’s no need on Britain’s part for a hard border with Ireland. Britain wouldn’t be imposing tariffs on European goods, so there’s no money to collect. The UK has exactly the same product standards as the Republic, so let’s not pretend you need to check for problems we all know don’t exist. Some changes may be needed but technology allows for smart borders: there was never any need for a Cold War-style Checkpoint Charlie. Irish citizens, of course, have the right to live and work in the UK in an agreement that long predates EU membership.

Of course, the EU might not like this British leap for independence. It might hit out with tariffs and impose burdens on Britain as it does on the US — but WTO rules put a cap on any retaliatory action. The worst it can get? We’re talking levies of an average 4 or 5 per cent. Which would be more than offset by a post-Brexit devaluation of the pound (which would have the added bonus of making British goods more competitive everywhere).

UK officialdom assumes that a deal is vital, which is why so little thought has been put into how Britain might just walk away. Instead, officials have concocted lurid scenarios featuring runs on the pound, gridlock at ports, grounded aircraft, hoarding of medicines and flights of investment. It’s been the pre-referendum Project Fear campaign on steroids. And let’s not forget how employment, investment and economic growth ticked up after the referendum.

[vtsnowedin]

Aussie (ex PM) Tony Abbott sums it up. Accurately, in my view.

I quite agree. I've had many thoughts along those same lines as I've watched this struggle from across the pond. Well written and to the point.

[fuzzy]

He's right, but the City doesn't want a devaluation of the pound, otherwise where are all the dictators going to move their stolen loot?

[Little John]

Guy Verhoffstadt lets the cat out of the bag.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ohQt0wp ... e=youtu.be

[fuzzy]

Oh good, I now know who I'm going to pester if I load Linux on my next PC - Steve. There's a pie in it for you.

[Little John]

hahaha

You're welcome mate. Just let me know, we can exchange emails and I will be more than happy to take you through any steps you need to understand.

[BritDownUnder]

Tony Abbott makes a lot of sense in those words. Here in Australia he has less than perfect reputation but he is ruthlessly efficient political operator with his own party and the Labor opposition alike.

I see the problem with the management of this Brexit process is that it is being done by people who are Remainers and secretly want to screw Brexit up so the UK ends up remaining. I think that there will be a bit of pain in the event of a hard Brexit but it will be made up by gain later. This is something that in modern democratic politics is difficult to sell.

Don't forget about Australia after Brexit - now Turnbull is gone there will be no problems with free trade - the UK has a lot of friends here. Australia has a lot of things to sell you if you get short of food, coal, gas or tomatoes.

[Mark]

Australia has a lot of things to sell you if you get short of coal, gas.....

Oh goody....

[BritDownUnder]

Australia has a lot of things to sell you if you get short of coal, gas.....

Oh goody....

I noticed you cut out the food bit from my quote.

[UndercoverElephant]

OK...having spent considerable time trying to get to grips with the detail of this, my position has changed. Why? Because I think this deal is looking pretty bad for the EU. Yes, signing up to a backstop we cannot get out of looks pretty bad, but to give TM any hope of getting it through Parliament, Barnier had to give away much more than he wanted to. The UK has succeeded in picking cherries, and they are legally binding in the backstop. I think France and Spain are very worried about the UK ending up stuck in the backstop.

What do we get if we're stuck in the backstop? We get tariff-free access to the single market (for goods), free movement is ended, and we get out of both the CAP and the CFP. Spain and France are clamouring now for changes to the political declaration (on future relationships) to "make clear that (after the backstop) our fishermen will retain access to UK waters", but that it not legally binding. This is the EU's own insistence that the WA is agreed before the trade deal coming back to bite them. But this gives us major leverage in future trade talks.

What all this means is that the EU will not want the UK to end up stuck in the backstop. Taking the deal also has the added advantage of injecting some serious poison into the tory party. A lot of their grass roots hate the deal, for the same reason the "hardline brexiteers" hate it. And yet what will they be able to do? Significant chunks of their vote with go over to UKIP.

I think as it becomes obvious in the next few days how upset the French and Spanish are about this deal, support for it in the UK will firm up. Whether it firms up enough to get it through parliament is another matter, but I'd give it a 50% chance.

[Little John]

Democracy has been denied by the mainstream political class in this country. One of two things are now going to happen. Either democracy will yet survive and the existing political order will be swept away on the back of a radical realignment of democratic politics in this country.

Or alternatives will be found.

[Lord Beria3]

Very interesting UE. I'm also softening to the deal as well.

I still think it's shit but not as bad as initially thought given the same reasons as you.

Eurointelligence has an excellent briefing on it...

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


May’s pushback started on the weekend with a media blitz that led even the uber-critical Daily Telegraph to express some admiration for her Lutherian here-I-stand attitude. It does not matter that Angela Merkel or Mark Rutte both said the deal was final. May says so herself. She will not renegotiate - beyond some technical details and of course the yet-unsettled question of the precise end date of a renewed transition period. It was left open in the draft treaty as 20xx. Michel Barnier is now proposing an end date of 2022, which is awkward for the UK's political timetable, as it takes the UK past the next scheduled elections. We presume that May will insist on a pre-election end-date. We are now talking about two or three transitional phases before a trade deal takes effect: the normal transition period running until December 2020; the extended transition with an end date yet to be agreed; and any period in which the all-UK backstop takes effect if there is no agreed trade deal by then. That period is open-ended, but legally finite nevertheless. The reason is that, under EU law, it is not deemed possible to use Article 50 to agree a permanent trade agreement. Which is why we are relaxed about the Hotel California/vassal state scenario. 

And...

We, too, have yet to read the treaty, but from the information available we doubt that May could have obtained a better deal. The UK will be able to leave the customs union and single market after a transition of uncertain length; the UK will have control of immigration policy; disturbance in the flow of traded goods will be kept to a minimum; and there will be no hard border within Ireland or in the Irish Sea. The EU also maintained its red lines, especially on a level playing field during the backstop phase, and on the Irish border. The negative reactions to the agreement in the UK have nothing to do with the actual agreement itself. Remainers want to frustrate Brexit, and many Brexiteers want no deal at all. Yesterday was just another opportunity for them to restate their points.

[Mark]

Australia has a lot of things to sell you if you get short of coal, gas.....

Oh goody....

I noticed you cut out the food bit from my quote.

Sorry....., all those lovely food miles too.....

[UndercoverElephant]

Germans don't like it either. I think the UK has, to a large extent, "won". EU overplayed its hand for far too long, and then realised late in the day that unless it capitulated on "cherry picking", there would be no deal. And then panicked.

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles ... im-victory

In meetings over recent days, the EU’s most powerful governments expressed fears the bloc is giving too much away in the charge to get a deal. Confronting populist anti-EU forces across Europe, leaders want one last opportunity to show that leaving the bloc can’t be as advantageous as staying in, and some have called for stringent conditions to restrict the British economy, according to diplomats present in the talks.

They are now worried that the UK economy is going to boom after brexit.