TheShed

I still think that parliament will keep pushing it down the road until it just fades away.

I have zero confidence in the parliamentary idiots ability to fix this.

Johnnyboy11

And BSE, from feeding ground up mad cows to live cows, and horse meat found in Tesco and Asda 'beefburgers'...

DXBtoDOH

EU have nixed May's request for an extension to 30 June, saying end of May is the most on offer (oh look, a pun without even trying!) And that is contingent on May passing MV3 next week. If it's subject to a vote. But May's speech last night apparently upset the MPs. A long extension is easier said than done, it could trigger a VONC so the government will do everything to avoid it.

That Parliament cannot get its act together to pass anything means the default outcome is no-deal. There are too many factions all pulling apart from each other and all factions believe if they play their cards correctly they will get the outcome they want. It's like watching a herd of pigs trying to play chess.

We will probably know next Wednesday thereabouts if it's no deal or some kind of last minute agreement. Till then it's wild swings in speculation.

DXBtoDOH

All very good examples.

captainflack

No deal, quite possible, but it would simply never stick even in the short term.

The 'no deal' support in parliament is very small in terms of numbers, though they might well get their way by default due to May's complete incompetence.

But it can never stick. It will lead to a very swift economic collapse. Industries such as manufacturing are simply not prepared, supply chains will collapse, the well oiled machine of industry will grind to a halt and farming will be destroyed without massive subsidies as they slash import tariffs. No dealers compare it to the millennium bug, and claim like that the warnings of possible chaos will not come to pass. But I worked in IT and even as a small company back in the late 90s, we got contacted about 18 months before the millennium and given a free two day training course telling us how to review all our software and hardware for compatibility and have backups and have a plan. And of course, pretty much everything in terms of software and hardware that consumers and businesses were using had been fixed because everyone knew that 1 Jan 2000 was absolutely certain to come.

With brexit, most businesses have just looked at what little preparation the government has done as a guide they simply cannot allow 'no deal', and baulked at the costs involved in having a plan for an event that might not even happen, and have simply don't nothing.

No deal would be chaos. The UK already says even if the deal gets voted through, it needs a delay of three months to prepare (May has asked for June 30th). And that's with a transition period so that for businesses etc. nothing actually changes. It's purely time to pass the required domestic legislation. So with 'no deal', none of that legislation will be in place. The UK will suddenly find itself outside the EU, but without the legal frameworks in place domestically. Just think about that again - even if May's deal passes and there is a transition where nothing actually changes until end of 2020, she still needs 3 months to put things in place.

And to add to this, you're going to have chaos at the ports, airports, and so on. I have no doubt there would quickly be side deals with the EU to mitigate the problems, quite possibly signing up to a temporary extension of the single market and customs union for 2 years or whatever. But this would be strictly on the EU's terms. As they have already done with derivatives in banking, they will extend rights where it suits them, but on the clear understanding that companies must use that time to move their operations to the EU. I expect they will do the same with car companies and so on. The EU will keep the UK on life support. But only so it can harvest its organs.

It should be noted that wherever the UK has made catastrophically bad policy decisions - poll tax, Iraq war, etc. it has been done in the face of huge public opposition. In the case of 'no deal', industry and business, the NHS, the civil service, the ports, the hauliers have all been warning of catastrophe from the beginning. But a few Tory MPs, Farage and the pub bores apparently know better.

My money would be on businesses knowing more about their businesses than the talking heads of UKIP, and that if 'no deal' comes to pass, it will be a sh1t show of proportions we have not witnessed in our lifetimes.

The delicious irony is that we have Jeremy Corbyn as Labour leader, but it's the Tory party thatcher wing who are dancing on thatcher's grave over the single market and basically ripping up the fundamentals of the UK economic success of the past 40+ years and sending the japanese car companies packing and so on. And the further irony is that Cameron did this whole referendum to try to fix the Tory party divisions, but it's made their party more divided than ever, and however this ends up, it's probably going to split.

I reckon it will be no deal, May will go, the Tory party membership (average age 75+, that's average age) will elect Boris or a brexitter, and in the chaos that ensues after no deal, we'll need someone capable of building bridges and eating humble pie and begging a way back into the single market and customs union, instead we'll have a floppy-haired d1ckhead sitting on a tank wearing a union jack waistcoat and urging the public to fight them on the beaches, etc.

Millhouse

I'm not even a brexiter (I'm quite neutral in all of this but staying in the EU would probably benefit me in the longer term) but this is a very sandard paranoid tone from you, yet again.

The only way it affects me is I'm currently in the process of buying a flat in london - I've managed to get loads off the seller already but if we crash out, I shall be seeking to get more cash off the table.

captainflack

It is not paranoid at all. Virtually all major industry bodies, the TUC, the CBI, car manufacturers, farming, economists, etc. are saying the same. The UK is simply not prepared. The CBI and TUC joint letter today calls it a 'national emergency'. Maybe they're being paranoid too, but they're really not natural bedfellows.

If people remember back to the referendum, "no deal" just wasn't something anyone on the leave side suggested. And they were convinced that the UK had a strong hand, it was one country versus 27, it would remain united while it picked the 27 apart and got them all fighting each other, and it was inconceivable that the Germans etc. would not back down, because cars, prosecco, etc. It's fair to say I think that it's turned out the other way. The EU seems utterly united, while the UK is tearing itself apart.

From a purely selfish point of view, I am a permanent resident in Portugal own a house (which turned out to be a pretty good deal in 2014, has doubled in value since). My kids are are school and are bilingual, and we should all be citizens in next year or so (my wife's an immigration lawyer here), so I will still be an EU citizen and have the right to live and work across the EU whatever happens. Even my parents moved to the next street to us late last year, so even if the pound craters, it's going to have little effect on me or any inheritance I might get at some point in the hopefully distance future (no inheritance tax in portugal either, and tax free NHR scheme too, so they pay zero tax for 10 years).

In fact, I think the EU will work much better without the UK, which has frequently vetoed rules on banking secrecy, or demanded opt outs and threatened to disrupt things until it gets what it wants.

I haven't been to the UK for nearly three years, and now my parents are here and my brother is in the US, not sure I will for a long time.

So not really sure why I'm anti brexit really. I have no great love for the UK, and there will be a certain car crash type enjoyment in seeing the place fall apart, especially if it's Boris Johnson who gets handed the shovel and told to try to clear up the mess.

Actually now I come to think of it, it's going to be epic and hilarious in equal manner. I really cannot wait.

Edo

'Cancel Brexit' petition passes 1m signatures on Parliament site

So considering such passionate voices of some British expats against staying in the EU I wonder what is it that we know but the local Brits don't.


Also including this for good measure: Fewer than 70 people march during the Brexit Betrayal March

Miss Ann Thrope

Well the cumbersome, bureaucratic, unresponsive, undemocratic EU seems to have nimbly outmanouvred the UK (or rather Tory) government with consummate ease. Bodes well for the UK sinn fein ("ourselves alone") future.

For example, I dont recall Farage or Johnson mentioning this:
https://www.irishtimes.com/news/irel...rder-1.3835621
Though in fairness I cannot see what the UK could gain from a trade deal with the US anyway. The US business lobby is paramount which is why their regulations so dramatically favour large scale industrial farming (not just chlorinated chickens but the far more insidious and widespread use of growth hormones such as BST, lack of requirement for consumer labelling about fundamental things like GMO etc etc). The EU still has a lot of small and medium scale farmers who vote so it is their interests, which align much more with consumers' interests, that prevail. In general the EU is pretty hot on consumer rights over those of big business: just think of flights, mobile roaming, data protection, electrical safety standards.... oh and bendy bananas of course

Mind you, one rather nauseating side-effect of Brexshit has been the amount of self-congratulation among the Irish political class about how much better they have handled things than their UK counterparts. Sadly it's justified.

captainflack

The brexitters argue that WTO rules are "nothing to fear" when it comes to trade with the EU, which makes up about 50% of our trade. At the same time, they rule out a customs union because it stops the UK signing its own deals. Because apparently WTO rules are absolutely intolerable and punishing, so we need to do deals with the US and China, which will create HUGE benefits.

Clearly this argument doesn't stand up to even basic logical analysis. We will go from the best possible deal on trade (completely free, no tariffs, no checks, common regulations) to the worse with the EU (50% of our trade) and brush it off, hardly noticing. And yet reducing tariffs (but not most other trade barriers) for a country that is maybe 20% of our trade, is going to somehow produce net benefits higher than those we lose with the EU. This makes no sense at all, and it's quite clear that the brexitters themselves are too intelligent to actually believe this.

The motivation for leaving the EU and doing a US trade deal has nothing to do with trade benefits. It's a political choice. The UK has pursued the european economic and political model since the second world war. Nationalized healthcare, social services, high regulation, trade union freedoms, subsidies for farming and other industries, and so on. This started long before the UK joined the common market. The brexitters know that talk of being 'independent' is misleading, because the UK is simply not big enough to create its own standards or rules. It's really a choice as to whether the UK hitches its wagon to the EU, or to the US. Brexitters have long wished to pursue a US style economic model in the UK - slash rules on holidays, worker protections, public provision of healthcare, environmental standards and so on. But it simply cannot be done within the EU, or while tied to EU regulations. They know that a no deal will crash the economy, but they'd try to use that as grounds to sign a "bend over and part your cheeks" trade deal with Trump that would effectively require the UK to slash its rules, and effectively Americanize the UK economy. Unlike EU rules, which the UK had a seat at the table and an effective veto over, the UK will simply have to accept US rules without any influence over them. It's not inconceivable that such deals would effectively force the UK to mirror US rules on gun ownership for example, because domestic regulation that effectively keeps a major US industry (one that is politically very well connected) excluded would all be subject to debate.

Also worth pointing out that the UK has quite a large trade surplus with the US. How does that square with the oft-repeated (but flawed) brexit mantra that we hold the cards in the EU negotiation because of our trade deficit? That we buy more than we sell? On this basis, it's clear the US will hold the cards there, even aside from the fact they won't be in the middle of an economic meltdown, and are 5 or 6 times bigger. Again, it's selective reasoning, they pull out arguments where it suits them, but then hope nobody notices when the same arguments flatly contradict their reasoning elsewhere.

captainflack

I met someone recently who insisted the UK needed to leave the EU and control its borders because of the threat of terrorist attacks. I pointed out that the UK always had border checks between the UK and France/Netherlands/Belgium/etc, and still does, but has a common travel area with Ireland, which the UK insists it will maintain and avoid a hard border (as well as promising the DUP there will be no checks or border between NI and Britain). But apparently this is all ok, because Ireland is a white, christian country of nice friendly people (Wogan and Graham Norton, etc.) and the thought that Ireland would have some kind of indigenous extremists who'd pose a threat to the UK population was simply absurd. I mean, Irish terrorists blowing stuff up... what absurd scaremongering nonsense.

scrubbedexpat141

It's not Macron and Merkel who are to blame for this though mate.

I think sometimes people forget how fortunate they are to be British and have been brought up in such a stable, safe and protected environment. To call the EU a 'benevolent dictatorship' and the rest of your guff about the end of Britain is just utter bollocks.

Someone had to do something to make something happen. I think the EU should have been laughing saying it's the 29th or nothing, now give us something we agree on or **** off.

captainflack

If they really, really want to put an end to this, as Theresa May claims, then here's a plan.

1. On Monday, parliament will accept the most popular (or least unpopular) of the various alternatives to May's deal, assuming she doesn't get another vote on that which passes. Parliament will accept this option as the best it can agree on for leaving with a deal.

2. The UK will agree an extension with the EU based on the following proposal. Since both the government and parliament has been unable after three years to come up with an answer as to which 'leave' choice they want, they will ask the people again. There will be three options on the ballot. No deal, Cancel brexit, leave with parliament's preferred deal option. It will be a transferrable vote system, so you rank your first and second choice. If no choice gets more than 50% of first round votes, then second choices are considered. This will probably mean a 9 month or so extension in order to arrange the new referendum. The UK will have to hold European elections, the EU will insist on that, since the EU parliament cannot legally run without UK members if the UK is still a member.

It's true the original referendum was 'leave'. But it's also true that both the government, and parliament, which is responsible for leaving cannot agree on what way to leave. Every brexitter thinks their brexit is the one true brexit.

Labour and some other parties are pushing for a general election, but there is no certainty this will result in a clear majority for anything either. We could find ourselves back in the same situation, with either party in power but unable to find agreement or get enough support for its own version of brexit.

This simply needs to end. It would not be right for parliament to simply cancel brexit unilaterally, and I don't think they want to. Similarly, there is no support for no deal, and no indication that the public wants that either.

Rather than politicians claiming to argue about what the people want, it's time to put the choices to them. Nobody surely can have any problem with this? If you're going to hold up the previous referendum as indicating a wish to leave the EU, then surely it's only fair to let the people resolve the question of how this should be done, or whether (given what we now know about some of the promises) it even commands public support.

One way or another, this has to end, and there has to be a definitive resolution. The uncertainty is killing the UK, not just because the economy is sliding and businesses are making decisions to move abroad, but because the UK government is paralyzed, unable to do anything else but deal with brexit.

And this time, the referendum needs to be not just advisory, so that the electoral commission can nullify if they find gross violations in spending, etc. (as they did last time, but claimed they could not nullify it as it was only advisory).

My personal view is that the country is so divided that people must all compromise on some kind of soft brexit, but if they can't, then it's going to come down to a shoot out between no deal or no brexit. And nobody but the public should be able to make that decision.

Johnnyboy11

I believe there should be a fourth option on any such second referendum: "Full Intergration with the EU".
By which we would ditch the pound and adopt the Euro, disband the UK military and join the Europen Army, accept the supremacy of the European Federal Government and recognise Jean-Claude Juncker as our President, oh, and underwrite the EUR 1 Trillion debt owing by Italy and Spain to Germany through the Target2 settlement system. If this is where we are heading, and I strongly believe it is, then it should be on the ballot paper.

captainflack

I am always slightly amused by the reluctance to commit to an EU army.

The UK is after all a member of NATO, whose Supreme Commander in Europe is always an American.

Put all our troops, and the defence of our continent and country under the command of a foreigner whose family will be safely several thousand miles away across the atlantic if the balloon goes up, and who answers to a foreign president the UK citizens have zero say in? Sure, why not.

Sit around a table as an equal and agree rules on the bendiness of bananas and power limits on hairdryers with our neighbours. Pfff, what an outrageous violation of our sovereignty and dignity.

European reliance on NATO was always risky, we've just been fortunate that since the war every single US president has been strongly committed to the freedom and security of western Europe. With Trump in power, nobody could seriously argue that this is the case. It was a flawed assumption. Europe simply has no choice but to circle the wagons itself and defend itself.