Brexit discussion thread IV

Zubeneschamali · 28-06-2018 4:01pm

Peregrinus wrote: »

They've looked at a crash-out Brexit, and they've priced it. They reckon they can deal with it.

I don't believe that for a second. All the talk I have seen has gone like:

We can handle a no-deal Brexit.

"What about airline flights?"

Oh, of course some deal will be reached to deal with those!

"What about food on the shelves in the UK?"

Well of course we'll have a deal in place for that.

"Medicines?"

Them, too.

"EU citizens rights to live and work in the UK?"

Well, of course!!

etc.

Nate--IRL-- · 28-06-2018 4:07pm

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

I don't believe that for a second. All the talk I have seen has gone like:
.

I'll hazard a guess he was talking about the EU perspective.

Nate

Zubeneschamali · 28-06-2018 4:10pm

Nate--IRL-- wrote: »

I'll hazard a guess he was talking about the EU perspective.

So am I.

Does anyone really think the EU wants the UK to descend into anarchy on the EUs doorstep?

Silent Running · 28-06-2018 4:15pm

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

So am I.

Does anyone really think the EU wants the UK to descend into anarchy on the EUs doorstep?

I don't know... a UK that has had a dose of reality might be a less belligerent UK and, perhaps, a better future European partner. You know, actually engaging with Europe and not trying to hold it back and make it break up.

Leroy42 · 28-06-2018 4:19pm

The EU is nothing if not pragmatic. They will not want the potential chaos just to prove a point, especially if the UK compromise.

That why I see a fudge. The Uk seem to be banking on a fudge in their favour (they keep the red lines) but I don't see that. The best I can see is that A50 is extended and the UK continues on as now, but then they will have to continue to pay into the EU.

ambro25 · 28-06-2018 4:21pm

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

Nate--IRL-- wrote: »

I'll hazard a guess he was talking about the EU perspective.

So am I.

Does anyone really think the EU wants the UK to descend into anarchy on the EUs doorstep?

There is a clear difference between what the EU27 may want (in context, to avoid) as an outcome, and what they can get, constrained as they are by the EU ruleset and the political context posited by a collective decision of 27.

In short: you can expect the same, continuing expediency about a hard Brexited U.K., for the sake of preserving the integrity of the EU27 SM.

Nody · 28-06-2018 4:21pm

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

So am I.

Does anyone really think the EU wants the UK to descend into anarchy on the EUs doorstep?

Want to? No. Willing to compromise itself (i.e. UK's ideas of trading in single market/CU but not being in it etc.) to stop it? No way in the seven hells. Remember that UK can go crashing out without EU can do anything about it; hence it's not so much about what EU wants as how stupid UK are going to be about it.

Imreoir2 · 28-06-2018 4:28pm

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

If she always intended to go for a Hard brexit, they would have been taking real action to prepare for it. They haven't prepared anything, so in my book that means they were never intending that.

The problem with actual preparations is that it necessitates admitting all the problems that a hard Brexit, or a no-deal Brexit will bring.
Build huge car parks at Dover to handle all the trucks held up in customs = admitting that government policy will result in significant customs delays, which is something business will go ape **** over.

Strazdas · 28-06-2018 4:38pm

Leroy42 wrote: »

The EU is nothing if not pragmatic. They will not want the potential chaos just to prove a point, especially if the UK compromise.

That why I see a fudge. The Uk seem to be banking on a fudge in their favour (they keep the red lines) but I don't see that. The best I can see is that A50 is extended and the UK continues on as now, but then they will have to continue to pay into the EU.

They can only fudge to a limited degree though. If a developed western country and economy completely loses the plot (which Brexit Britain certainly is by removing itself from the Single Market and Customs Union), there is only so much they can do.....they might have to allow the UK crash and burn if it refuses to back down on its red lines.

An Claidheamh · 28-06-2018 4:40pm

An Ciarraioch wrote: »

On a more serious note, leading Tory Brexiteer Lord Ashcroft has written an article extolling Malta as an EU base for post-Brexit UK companies:

https://www.conservativehome.com/platform/2018/06/lord-ashcroft-special-report-malta-makes-a-strong-case-to-host-the-eu-outposts-of-british-companies-after-brexit.html

The only reason he wants business to go to Malta is because they're in his British commonwealth, a boring powerless relic of his country's old dominance,
and because it was given a George Cross by Britain, which is rather patronising to give a country.

Again with the Brexiteers ww2 - the war the Soviets won.

Shouldn't this guy be telling the Maltese to leave the "crumbling EU" aswell instead of encouraging British business to avoid tax there.

These people are unbelievable.

Their "lowers" who supported them deserve everything they get from Brexit.

Imreoir2 · 28-06-2018 4:43pm

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

If we get to February and the UK is facing Mad Max day in March, the EU will bend the rules to prevent utter chaos. Extend Article 50 for 5 years and appoint Barnier negotiator-for-life.

It's not quite so simple, extending Art 50 is a headache. Will the UK elect MEP's for the extension period?

If the UK crashes out there will be significant disruption over a short period of time. If you extend Art 50 for years, there will be significant uncertainty for a long period of time. I'm not sure which is worse, especially if you have no reason to believe that the long period of uncertainty will prevent the chaos later.

We should not assume that preventing the UK from crashing out by any means is the only consideration. Given that the UK has come nowhere near to offering an acceptable compromise in two years, there is not much sense in thinking that more time will improve the situation. Assuming the UK's whitepaper offers nothing new, its not impossible that the EU will take the view that the UK crashing out now is better than the UK crashing out later, and being a distraction and drain on resources until they do. It might be better to rip off the band-aid now. Seeing the reality of a no-deal Brexit is probably what it will take to convince them to accept a reasonable deal.

briany · 28-06-2018 4:58pm

Jacob Rees Mogg reminds me of the G-Man from the Half Life games. You could imagine him calmly walking through the background of a chaotic scene in post-Brexit Britain, briefly turning to look and dispassionately say, "Oh, that's a shame..." before moving on.

demfad · 28-06-2018 5:00pm

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

So am I.

Does anyone really think the EU wants the UK to descend into anarchy on the EUs doorstep?

The UK will be obliged to ask for an official extension of A50 or they can revoke A50. A50 can be revoked in good faith: i.e not as a negotiating tactic.
If they don't they will ask for emergency re-admittance pending the UK parliament agreeing to this. I see this happening on Day 2 of no-deal.

The UK is NOT preparing or prepared for a no-deal.

Imreoir2 · 28-06-2018 5:06pm

demfad wrote: »

The UK will be obliged to ask for an official extension of A50 or they can revoke A50. A50 can be revoked in good faith: i.e not as a negotiating tactic.
If they don't they will ask for emergency re-admittance pending the UK parliament agreeing to this. I see this happening on Day 2 of no-deal.

The UK is NOT preparing or prepared for a no-deal.

It's easy to fall off the cliff, not so easy to climb back over it. If they do crash out they can't be allowed back in without a lengthy admission process, and certainly not if there is any hint that they might want to leave again in a few years time.

If they crash out, it will be a question of ad-hoc agreements to mitigate the worst hardships until a more permanent deal can be put together, the difference being that by then the UK government can no longer pretend that no deal is better than a bad deal.

Zubeneschamali · 28-06-2018 5:09pm

Nody wrote: »

Want to? No. Willing to compromise itself (i.e. UK's ideas of trading in single market/CU but not being in it etc.) to stop it? No way in the seven hells.

Oh, I agree, but that is not at all what I am talking about.

When the UK bumbles all the way to the deadline with nothing prepared for hard Brexit, and then turns around and asks for an extension to A50 to avoid the utter chaos of a crash out, will the EU refuse?

Of course not.

Zubeneschamali · 28-06-2018 5:13pm

Imreoir2 wrote: »

Build huge car parks at Dover to handle all the trucks held up in customs = admitting that government policy will result in significant customs delays, which is something business will go ape **** over.

The problem with not making these preparations is that crash-out in March 2019 becomes unthinkable and no longer useful as a negotiating chip. The EU can let the UK huff and puff knowing that ultimately they will have to sign any exit deal the EU puts on the table, however unfavourable.

Zubeneschamali · 28-06-2018 5:15pm

Strazdas wrote: »

they might have to allow the UK crash and burn if it refuses to back down on its red lines.

Crash and burn in some economic reduced GDP sense, sure.

Literally burn, as in people rioting and setting fire to Parliament, no, we probably do not want to let things go there.

trellheim · 28-06-2018 5:15pm

A50 extension needs BOTH SIDES ; UK to ask for it and EU to grant it.

This is impossible in my view as unless we see a massive change in the Commons ( remember - everyone fell into line last week and the bill sailed through ). Unless the PR from business gets real scorched earth in the next few weeks

Zubeneschamali · 28-06-2018 5:24pm

trellheim wrote: »

A50 extension needs BOTH SIDES ; UK to ask for it and EU to grant it.

This is impossible in my view as unless we see a massive change in the Commons

Come February 2019, the UK can either ask for Article 50 to be extended or sign whatever Canada type exit deal the EU puts on the table. Which of those will be easier for Parliament to swallow?

What they can't do is what people seem to think will happen by default - crash out with no deal. No planes in the air. No UK drivers allowed to drive on the Continent. There will be no food on shelves within a week, no drugs in hospitals within a fortnight. No fuel on forecourts.

Food riots. Army on the streets keeping rioters away from Westminster.

We are talking scenes from a failed 3rd world state, in London. It is out of the question.

Leroy42 · 28-06-2018 5:54pm

How do other non EU countries survive? I mean I'm with the whole Brexit is crazy side, but rioting, food shortages?

kunst nugget · 28-06-2018 5:55pm

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

Come February 2019, the UK can either ask for Article 50 to be extended or sign whatever Canada type exit deal the EU puts on the table. Which of those will be easier for Parliament to swallow?

What they can't do is what people seem to think will happen by default - crash out with no deal. No planes in the air. No UK drivers allowed to drive on the Continent. There will be no food on shelves within a week, no drugs in hospitals within a fortnight. No fuel on forecourts.

Food riots. Army on the streets keeping rioters away from Westminster.

We are talking scenes from a failed 3rd world state, in London. It is out of the question.

It would be fascinating to see though...

An Claidheamh · 28-06-2018 5:56pm

An Ciarraioch wrote: »

Evidently no-one told the BBC that the Taoiseach doesn't follow soccer:

https://mobile.twitter.com/adamfleming/status/1012298147442446336

I know this is a bit off topic but excerpts from the pro-Brexit types on twitter reacting to an Irish person not going out of his way to support the English football team.

Exhibit #1,856 of Brexiteers :

"I am surprised he do not say Spain ?
Backing royalty & fascism in Europe..... the Leo way."

"Send in 2 para"

"at least it's an improvement on supporting the Nazis against us. Wonder if we can expect condolence notes & flags at half-mast should the belgians be vanquished"

"No just English people should support England"

"then why are we supporting them on the BRexit negotiations ?"

So that's a mixture of Brexiteers who think Varadkar is from England, and he should not be allowed back to England????

That we're supporting them in Brexit?

They're going to boycott our agriculture and put up a hard border.

They should send para troopers.

We supported the Nazis because we support the Belgian 2018 soccer team???

We shouldn't support Belguim because they're "royal, anti-democratic and fascist"?

Also it's made the British print media, daily mail, etc.

Deary me.

CelticRambler · 28-06-2018 6:04pm

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

What they can't do is what people seem to think will happen by default - crash out with no deal. No planes in the air. No UK drivers allowed to drive on the Continent. There will be no food on shelves within a week, no drugs in hospitals within a fortnight. No fuel on forecourts.

Food riots. Army on the streets keeping rioters away from Westminster.

We are talking scenes from a failed 3rd world state, in London. It is out of the question.

Project Fear

Project Fear

Project Fear

:rolleyes:

There will be plenty of food and fuel available the day after a crash-out Brexit, and the week after, and probably even the month after. And because there'll be no immediate meltdown, the hard Brexiteers will continue to proclaim the Gospel according to Saints Jacob and Boris as if nothing had changed.

So there'll be no immediate need for the army on the streets, and there'll be no demand for an extension to A50 on the part of the UK, nor any enthusiasm for granting one by the EU. The EU can survive without the UK; so other than giving some help to Ireland to deal with an unwanted border, that'll be the end of the Brexit saga; next item on the agenda please.

On the other hand, I think it's far more likely that the Tories will sacrifice the "and NI" bit of the UK despite no prime-minister supposedly being unable to agree to that. An east-west border has always been the simplest, most logical solution to this situation. TM's days are numbered, so when the time comes, she'll be sacrificed along with the DUP to whom she sold her soul so that Leavers and Remainers alike can "just get on with it".

flutered · 28-06-2018 6:55pm

Imreoir2 wrote: »

The problem with actual preparations is that it necessitates admitting all the problems that a hard Brexit, or a no-deal Brexit will bring.
Build huge car parks at Dover to handle all the trucks held up in customs = admitting that government policy will result in significant customs delays, which is something business will go ape **** over.

there is an interesting piece on the mail online as regards buissness by ids, by does he cover the lower depths

flutered · 28-06-2018 6:57pm

Strazdas wrote: »

They can only fudge to a limited degree though. If a developed western country and economy completely loses the plot (which Brexit Britain certainly is by removing itself from the Single Market and Customs Union), there is only so much they can do.....they might have to allow the UK crash and burn if it refuses to back down on its red lines.

would not the uk be in an uncomfortable place if they had to decide on either the eu or the imf

flutered · 28-06-2018 7:01pm

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

I disagree. It is in the EUs interest that the UK never leaves at all. It is in the EUs interest that if the UK does leave, it stays in the Single Market and Customs Union. If the UK ever leaves, a Norway model is in the EUs interests. If the UK is going for a Hard Brexit, it is in the EUs interest that it does it in an orderly way with a suitable transition period and an arrangement for the NI border.

These are all EU interests which a hard Brexit next March would damage. Given the choice next February of damaging its own interests by forcing a Hard brexit with no preparation, or extending A50 to allow one of these better outcomes to be negotiated, the EU will kick the can down the road.

Not for the sake of the Brits being tied to the radiator of Imperator Mays war-rig, but purely out of EU self-interest.

And if they do punt, I think they will go long - extend negotiations for 5 years to take the deadlines and headlines out of them. The whole matter can be delegated to Barnier and a permanent staff and the EU can move on and talk about real stuff.

Of course the UK press will go mental, but they will do that no matter what happens, and the EU doesn't really care anymore.

the problem as regard that is barniers supposed interest in replacing junker

Trasna1 · 28-06-2018 7:01pm

Leroy42 wrote: »

How do other non EU countries survive? I mean I'm with the whole Brexit is crazy side, but rioting, food shortages?

Countries survive outside the EU because they have the systems in place to deal with the volume of imports and exports they need to sustain themselves.

That said the talk of food shortages, rioting and all round general mayhem on the immediate aftermath of Brexit are a bit far fetched since if there is no deal the UK will have a couple of months to stockpile, prepare and buy time.

You might see disturbances at the NI border though.

Imreoir2 · 28-06-2018 7:05pm

Leroy42 wrote: »

How do other non EU countries survive? I mean I'm with the whole Brexit is crazy side, but rioting, food shortages?

Other non-EU countries have not just crashed out of the EU after 40 years of integration in it. No one said that it is not possible to have other arrangements outside the EU, but any country would have serious problems if it ripped up all it's trade deals over night and cancelled it's cooperation, regulation and mutual recognition arrangements with its closest neighbors with nothing to replace them.

flutered · 28-06-2018 7:11pm

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

If we get to February and the UK is facing Mad Max day in March, the EU will bend the rules to prevent utter chaos. Extend Article 50 for 5 years and appoint Barnier negotiator-for-life.

the eu are not in rule bending mode as regards the uk

sink · 28-06-2018 7:51pm

The leaked report by DExEU which predicted food and medicine shortages in the days and weeks after a crash out, was not talking about a total shortage of food and medicine, but far more limited shortages of specific products. Britain will certainly be able to feed itself with staples like bread and potatoes, it was not predicting a famine. Raw ingredients such as grain and sugar which can be delivered by tanker load and processed by national food processors will not run out. However it will likely run out of selected products, mainly ones that are processed and packaged abroad, which arrive by trucks through RORO ports. Same thing goes for medicines, Britain will not run out of medicines which are manufactured locally which is a significant proportion, but may run out of certain medicines which it has to import from Europe via the RORO ports.

It will be bad, people wont be able to find their favourite brands/fruits/vegetables on the supermarket shelf and will likely panic buy, exacerbating the situation. However it won't be apocalyptic. No one is likely to starve, the worst effect will be people who rely on specific medicines which run out. Even they will likely still be able to buy on the black market at inflated prices. The products with the highest demand/shortage will be smuggled in.

However, even a far more limited crisis than a famine could lead to rioting. The tabloids will likely play the crisis up, increasing the fear of food shortages, leading to angry irrational mobs. Fights could easily break out between people trying to buy the last jar of Nutella, which could lead to rioting and looting, which will again be exacerbated by the news media.

Brexit discussion thread IV

Comments