Current Politics in the United Kingdom

[haroldeye]

Laura Kunesberg tore Corbyn apart when she interviewed him about this. She asked what Plan A was and he said to negotiate with the EU. She then asked what Plan B was if Plan A failed. Corbyn said we'll negotiate more.

[vinceprince]

Originally Posted by haroldeye

Laura Kunesberg tore Corbyn apart when she interviewed him about this. She asked what Plan A was and he said to negotiate with the EU. She then asked what Plan B was if Plan A failed. Corbyn said we'll negotiate more.

I suppose he could just follow the May plan - talk tough at home and then totally cave in at the first sign of pressure.

Due to our great Sovereign democracy if you don't like the deal made you can simply vote them out at the next election. Great British Democracy
Maybe a UKIP revival. They might even get 2 seats next time.

I don't remember any prospectus for the exact type of deal we should get, indeed Norway and Switzerland were held up as fine examples by Gove and Johnson etc as what could be achieved without actual EU membership.

The ridiculous overblown pledges made by the leave side now are facing political and economic reality.

[Wendigo]

Originally Posted by haroldeye

Laura Kunesberg tore Corbyn apart when she interviewed him about this. She asked what Plan A was and he said to negotiate with the EU. She then asked what Plan B was if Plan A failed. Corbyn said we'll negotiate more.

Brings to mind the old Churchill quote with one slight change

I remember when I was a child, being taken to the celebrated Barnum's Circus, which contained an exhibition of freaks and monstrosities, but the exhibit on the programme which I most desired to see was the one described as "The Boneless Wonder". My parents judged that the spectacle would be too demoralising and revolting for my youthful eye and I have waited fifty years, to see the The Boneless Wonder sitting on the oposition Bench.

[haroldeye]

Originally Posted by vinceprince

I suppose he could just follow the May plan - talk tough at home and then totally cave in at the first sign of pressure.

Due to our great Sovereign democracy if you don't like the deal made you can simply vote them out at the next election. Great British Democracy
Maybe a UKIP revival. They might even get 2 seats next time.

I don't remember any prospectus for the exact type of deal we should get, indeed Norway and Switzerland were held up as fine examples by Gove and Johnson etc as what could be achieved without actual EU membership.

The ridiculous overblown pledges made by the leave side now are facing political and economic reality.

The May plan is equally a pile of horse ordure, but we will be able to bring her and her sorry pack of tossers to account. The Euro Commissioners will continue to f*ck the people of Europe over whilst their little plans for a new unholy Roman Empire are brought to fruition.

It is in everyone's interest to get a working deal out of Brexit, except that is people like Junkers, Verhofstedt etc. But heyho what do they care if youth unemployment in Portugal, Spain and Greece is over 20%, they still have salaries perks and pensions.

As to Mr Corbyn it would seem even the StB thought him more idiot than useful. It's the people that are pulling his strings that worry me.

[Wendigo]

Originally Posted by ********

Labour will keep shifting as it becomes obvious what a disaster Brexit is and people get desperate to escape it.

No Labour will keep shifting purely as they have elected an idiot in charge.

[jacques22]

Originally Posted by haroldeye

It is in everyone's interest to get a working deal out of Brexit, except that is people like Junkers, Verhofstedt etc.

That's what you get wrong. The UK and the EU have completely divergent interests.

The UK voted Brexit to cut immigration and reject EU laws and membership. They don't seem to understand that the price to pay for more national sovereignty is losing most of the economic benefits from EU membership.

The EU's interest in the Brexit negotiations is to protect the integrity of the single market and customs union. Which means that the UK can't get a better deal outside the EU than when it was a member.

At least, the EU is not delusional like the UK. The Europeans know Brexit is all about damage limitation, while the Brits believe something can be gained from Brexit.

[Wendigo]

Originally Posted by jacques22

That's what you get wrong. The UK and the EU have completely divergent interests.

The UK voted Brexit to cut immigration and reject EU laws and membership. They don't seem to understand that the price to pay for more national sovereignty is losing most of the economic benefits from EU membership.

The EU's interest in the Brexit negotiations is to protect the integrity of the single market and customs union. Which means that the UK can't get a better deal outside the EU than when it was a member.

At least, the EU is not delusional like the UK. The Europeans know Brexit is all about damage limitation, while the Brits believe something can be gained from Brexit.

Far too simplistic I'm afraid, British voters backed for Brexit for various reasons, sure immigration was important to many but others like me were too young to have voted against joining the EEC in 1975, we have seen what the EU has become over 40 years and have become disillusioned; it has become everything we were told it would not be.
I accept full well that the EU don't want Britain to get a great deal that might encourage anti EU movements in other countries, however if their position is that there can be NO negotiations then as I and others have said we should walk away. The fact that talks are still going on means both sides see there is the possibility of a deal despite all the negative vibes from both sides.
The EU is already worried about the funding gap that will be left when Britain leaves and have already mooted the remaining countries will have to contribute more. Britain will be paying a large exit fee so it is a bit rich not to expect us to have any economic benefit. European countries will still be our neighbours and allies, it is just the EU many of us do not like.
So it is in both sides interests to reach a deal.

[DB83]

I see that Barmier has struck again.

A while ago he said "Nothing is agreed until everything is agreed' or words to that effect.

Total he brandishes a 100+ page document, a draft exit document, which contains items such as the Irish issue which St. Theresa immediately reacted that could never be accepted.

Provocative or what ?

As for Corbyn, he only changed his tune this week (although he sings from a different sheet almost every month) since he thought it could get him the keys to No.10.

[jacques22]

Originally Posted by Wendigo

I accept full well that the EU don't want Britain to get a great deal that might encourage anti EU movements in other countries, however if their position is that there can be NO negotiations then as I and others have said we should walk away.

The EU has been very clear since the very beginning: the Brits can leave or stay in the single market, and leave or stay in the customs union. It's up to the UK to choose. There are 5 clear scenarios: 1. stay in both the single market and the customs union; 2. stay only in the single market while paying a fee like Norway; 3. stay only in the customs union like Turkey; 4. leave both the single market and the customs union and have a Canada-style agreement; 5. No deal and WTO rules. It's a drop in GDP growth of 2 to 8% on a 15-year period, depending on the scenario, according to the May government study.

The trouble is that the May government still wants to claim the benefits of EU membership (single market, customs union, passporting rights especially for financial services) without the constraints or responsibilities (respecting the 4 freedoms -people, goods, services and capital-, accepting the ECJ jurisdiction, paying a fee to the EU). The Brits keep mentioning "creative ambiguity" to reach a deal because they are trapped in their own contradictions.

Originally Posted by Wendigo

The EU is already worried about the funding gap that will be left when Britain leaves and have already mooted the remaining countries will have to contribute more. Britain will be paying a large exit fee so it is a bit rich not to expect us to have any economic benefit. European countries will still be our neighbours and allies, it is just the EU many of us do not like.
So it is in both sides interests to reach a deal.

It's not an exit fee. The so-called divorce bill is the calculation of what the UK still owes to the EU budget, according to the 2014-2020 Multiannual Financial Framework. It's legally binding. That's why the EU accepted a transition period until December 2020, because it matches the UK contribution to the EU budget. During that transition period, the UK will still enjoy the economic benefits of EU membership, which is fair.

The funding gap is not an issue. The Europeans still have 2 full years to prepare the next Multiannual Financial Framework that will start in 2021. They plan to cut the funding for several programs. In the worst case scenario, they could still borrow from banks and financial institutions to plug the gap (interest rates are low in Europe, and growth in the Eurozone is stronger than in the UK, so financial institutions won't hesitate to finance projects that cost peanuts compared to the Greek crisis).

It's funny that you mention Europhobia. For decades, Brussels and the EU in general have been used as scapegoats by British politicians for their own failures. EU laws have improved standards for food and environment in the UK. EU institutions have also helped the UK cut costs on research because they operate like cooperatives (British cancer patients can get radiotherapy treatments because the UK is a Euratom member).
Even if you dislike EU laws, they only account for 13% of UK laws according to the BBC. With the Repeal Bill (MPs choosing which EU laws they want to keep or not), British politicians will waste years debating laws that don't hurt British citizens instead of saving their energy for more important domestic issues (NHS, housing, transportation, energy bill, etc...).
I often hear Brits complain about EU bureaucracy and red tape. Well, the UK will get more red tape after Brexit, because that's what taking sovereignty back means. The Irish border is one obvious example. Also in Dover, you can expect a huge queue of European trucks waiting for inspections. In the No Deal scenario, the EU will keep all the trade agreements it concluded with foreign nations while the UK will have to re-negotiate hundreds of trade deals (trading under WTO rules is not automatic). The Brits don't realize that EU membership gave the UK the opportunity to focus on important domestic issues while having almost automatic pilot on international ones. But the Brits did not seize that opportunity, and now yes, they are taking back control, but they will have to spend twice as much time and energy to achieve the same results.

[scoundrel]

Originally Posted by jacques22

That's what you get wrong. The UK and the EU have completely divergent interests.

The UK voted Brexit to cut immigration and reject EU laws and membership. They don't seem to understand that the price to pay for more national sovereignty is losing most of the economic benefits from EU membership.

The EU's interest in the Brexit negotiations is to protect the integrity of the single market and customs union. Which means that the UK can't get a better deal outside the EU than when it was a member.

At least, the EU is not delusional like the UK. The Europeans know Brexit is all about damage limitation, while the Brits believe something can be gained from Brexit.

I muat say I did wonder if the EU's interest in the negotiations might be in preserving existing trade relationships as much as achievable, in order to safeguard hundreds of thousands of jobs in the European Union economies. I thought it was we naughty British who were recklessly endangering prosperity and employment for purely ideological and doctrinaire reasons. I am grateful for this correction to my understanding.