Current Politics in the United Kingdom

[palo5]

This is getting bizarre. From what I read, the UK is now worried about a "no deal" exit, which we're told could be horrific. How horrific? Well, the UK government is now preparing to stockpile emergency food & medicines, in case they can't import enough. This is not fake news, and officials up to the Prime Minister have admitted it

Shortages of food & medicines? Seriously? I did a double-take when I read that, and wondered if I had mistaken the UK for Gaza

[vinceprince]

Originally Posted by palo5

This is getting bizarre. From what I read, the UK is now worried about a "no deal" exit, which we're told could be horrific. How horrific? Well, the UK government is now preparing to stockpile food & medicines, in case they can't import enough. This is not fake news, and officials up to the Prime Minister have admitted it

Shortages of food & medicines? Seriously? I did a double-take when I read that, and wondered if I had mistaken the UK for Gaza

This come from Raab the new Brexit Sec and Leave fanatic so you can't just blame 'more project fear from remainers'

Yeah stockpile tins of beans and medicines, didn't see that painted on the side of their bus. The Brexit dream eh?

[Wendigo]

I think this all boils down to "in case they cannot import enough" HMG has to look at ALL options including the 100% no deal exit, if they didn't they would be pilloried for not doing so.

Let's be clear, a no deal scenario would only come about if the EU keeps rejecting every UK proposal and time runs out, there is talk about extending the two years but if by then we are not a long way down the path to some form of mutual consent would it be worth it?
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-44950414

The EU is not blameless in this so let's not throw all the shit at the UK

[jacques22]

Originally Posted by Wendigo

Let's be clear, a no deal scenario would only come about if the EU keeps rejecting every UK proposal and time runs out (...) The EU is not blameless in this so let's not throw all the shit at the UK

The no-deal scenario only exists because the British government needed 2 full years to come up with a decent plan. The EU is the only negotiating party that has had the same clear goal since the Brexit referendum: to preserve the integrity of the single market.

The problem with the Cabinet is that they are not ready to accept the economic consequences of Brexit. It's now obvious that Brexit is an ideological project (rejecting the ECJ jurisdiction and EU laws, cutting European immigration by ending freedom of movement, stopping payments into the EU budget) that makes no sense from an economic perspective.

No deal is the most likely outcome because the UK still wants to have its cake and eat it. If you read the guidelines of the Cabinet's white paper, it clearly shows that the UK wants to retain some benefits of EU membership while undermining the single market.

For the record, Norway and Switzerland have access to the single market because they accept freedom of movement (yes, immigration) and contribute into the EU budget via grant schemes (which are like an access fee but don't cost as much as full EU membership).

In the white paper, the UK wants to have access to the single market for goods despite rejecting the 4 freedoms. That would be a better deal than what Norway and Switzerland have, and it could encourage EU members to leave the EU. May's 'common rulebook' (i.e. following EU standards for goods) is also a cunning way to avoid paying into the EU budget. The EU cannot accept that because it would destroy the integrity of the single market.

The UK has accepted that it will lose the passporting rights for financial services but it wants to sneak back into the single market for financial services by proposing a system of expanded equivalence or mutual recognition, which could offer the same benefits to the UK as the passporting rights. As a third country, the US only has a basic system of equivalence for financial services that does not give access to the single market. If the EU accepts May's proposal for financial services, the US and other third countries would ask for the same benefits, and that would again destroy the integrity of the single market.

May's customs proposal is a complete joke. Not just because the technology doesn't exist, but it also ignores the need for sanitary checks (avian flu, mad cow disease, swine flu) and would rob the EU of its sovereignty if the UK collects tariffs on behalf of the EU. Also it doesn't take into account the issue of smuggling.

In the white paper, the UK also wants to stay in some European agencies. The problem is that those agencies are policed by the ECJ. So if you reject the ECJ jurisdiction, there's no way you can participate in those agencies.

And finally, the Irish border. In a normal situation, there would be a hard border between Northern Ireland and the Republic for customs checks and sanitary checks. But because of the history of violence in Ireland and the Good Friday Agreement, the EU compromised and suggested the option of a sea border, with checks done in ports and airports. May claimed it would divide the UK as a country even though Northern Ireland already has different laws than England (i.e. abortion). The only option left for the EU is to quarantine Northern Ireland in order to perform the customs and sanitary checks while respecting the WTO rules. Basically, any trade between Northern Ireland and Europe would have to go through the Republic.

Some Brexiters believe that the UK should have access to the single market or at least have a deal because the UK is paying a divorce bill of about £40 billion. Sorry, but any leaving member must meet his liabilities and therefore pay a divorce bill. That divorce bill does not entitle the UK to a deal or give access to the single market. If the UK wants to blackmail the EU and refuses to pay the divorce bill, the UK's credit rating will collapse and other countries will be scared to make deals with such an unreliable partner.

Because May's white paper is threatening the integrity of the single market, the EU cannot accept those proposals and no deal has become the most likely scenario. May does not understand that the EU is fighting fo its survival.
And because the UK rejects the ECJ jurisdiction and the 4 freedoms, wants to make its own trade deals, and doesn't want to pay into the EU budget, the Canada-style deal is the only option left for May. Unfortunately, May is wasting time by stubbornly hoping to get the same benefits as Norway or Switzerland without accepting the same responsibilities or constraints.
So no deal.

[Wendigo]

Therefore if that is the case if the EU will not budge there is no point in carrying on what many of us have long felt are basically meaningless negotiations. Talking for talking sake.

I disagree about the divorce bill, if you want to use that analogy, if the split is irreconcilable then if we cannot have access to the children but the EU demand we still pay maintenance then I say no reason to pay out the whole of what the EU demand, I have long accepted we should pay a fair deal but it has to be on a quid pro quo basis.

[DB83]

Have not been in here for some time since nothing appeared to be happening. Then like with buses you wait ages for one and then two show up at the same time. This time the buses were named Davis and Doris

Got to feel somewhat anxious with St. Theresa now taking full charge of the final negotiations. Most men will not take kindly to a woman telling them (unless that woman has the name of Angela ) Raab had hardly got his feet under the desk when this bombshell was dropped.

And even if a deal is struck I fear a replay of those grand concessions that Call-me-Dave brought back. It might not even get through Parliament with the prospect of another GE.

[scoundrel]

To be quite honest, and having heard the outline of Mrs May's preferred negotiating position, I hope we crash out of the EU without a deal. My own preferences in order would be:

1. No deal.
2. Stay in the EU
3. Mrs' May's "shag me up the shitter" Brexit plan.

[jacques22]

Originally Posted by Wendigo

I disagree about the divorce bill, if you want to use that analogy, if the split is irreconcilable then if we cannot have access to the children but the EU demand we still pay maintenance then I say no reason to pay out the whole of what the EU demand, I have long accepted we should pay a fair deal but it has to be on a quid pro quo basis.

The UK is legally bound to pay its liabilities because as an EU member it agreed to the Multi-annual Financial Framework. The Cabinet can try and test the EU's resolve, but you can bet the ECJ will say the EU is right and the UK is wrong. Also, don't underestimate the cost to the UK's economy and reputation (credit rating, trading partners).
There is no quid pro quo basis with the divorce bill, because the UK is the one leaving while the other 27 members have decided to stay in the club. If one of them leaves, it will also have to meet its liabilities and pay a divorce bill. There's no discrimination here and no punishment against the UK. The law has to be respected. Simply no preferential treatment for the UK.

[Wendigo]

Originally Posted by jacques22

The UK is legally bound to pay its liabilities because as an EU member it agreed to the Multi-annual Financial Framework. The Cabinet can try and test the EU's resolve, but you can bet the ECJ will say the EU is right and the UK is wrong. Also, don't underestimate the cost to the UK's economy and reputation (credit rating, trading partners).
There is no quid pro quo basis with the divorce bill, because the UK is the one leaving while the other 27 members have decided to stay in the club. If one of them leaves, it will also have to meet its liabilities and pay a divorce bill. There's no discrimination here and no punishment against the UK. The law has to be respected. Simply no preferential treatment for the UK.

All of which should have been made abundantly clear prior to Article 50 being invoked so that personally cuts no ice with me.
I'll wait and see what HMG decide but like Scounds I wanted a negotiated deal but the way it is going I am veering towards favouring no deal, the British public voted to leave the EU not to stay in a neutered form of EU-lite.

[scoundrel]

If the UK leaves with no agreement, the "divorce" bill might not necessarily get paid. Someone would need to explain how we benefit by paying so much and getting no concessions at all.