How do we think EU negotiations will go? (Vol 5)

[Vanden Saab]

PRTVR said:

Could the contentious parts be there just to be removed, I used to work for a company that used the rumour mill when in negotiations with the work force, the rumor was always far worse than what the company wanted but conditioned the workforce so when the negotiations started there was relief and acceptance when it wasn't as bad as expected,
will there be general acceptance if the deal is watered down ?

That works fine when the employees have no option unfortunately in this case half your workforce have already gone and got jobs with your competition and with better terms, conditions and wages too.

[soupdragon1]

silentbrown said:

soupdragon1 said:

And here's the rub, DUP are under home pressure to accept the Irish Sea border backstop. They HATE the idea, but NI welcomes it. Most notably the Ulster farmers union, who are asking DUP to reconsider their stance. The farmers unions are HUGE local DUP supporters, so this is very significant. DUP took a very strong stance against T May in the HOC but at this point, it's just bluster, hoping for others to share that opinion and do the dirty work for them (ie, vote against it)
For the DUP to 'actually' vote against it, is another matter entirely. People assume they will vote against it, but in doing so, that comes with very high risk of their electorate turning their back on them.
I'll expand on this later when I've got more time, but looking underneath the surface, there is a lot more to the DUP position than meets he eye.

Interesting. A united Ireland would make the entire Brexit process a whole lot easier

This is the view of an independent unionist in NI, who broadly welcomes the deal.

BBC News - Brexit: Lady Sylvia Hermon expects to meet PM over deal
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-4623...

The DUP want to avoid a United Ireland at all costs. But let's look at how Brexit could pan out and how a United Ireland could happen.

Exit with no deal - terrible for NI. On it's own, it strengthens the opportunity for a referendum for a United Ireland via the good Friday agreement. If we compound this with the potential that a hard exit results in big issues in the UK, economic difficulties etc, NI have to option to up sticks and 'move house' to the EU via a United Ireland and leave the UK to sort out the mess. In summary, hard exit is something the DUP need to avoid at all costs.

General election- J Corbyn gets in. Ouch - DUP don't want that, it's nearly as bad as Leo V getting the PM job. While that in itself doesn't exactly lead to a UI, they know that it weakens their party.

Voting against the current deal. Not only are the risking the confidence and supply funding, they are also voting against what NI have welcomed, almost universal acceptance across NI business. Dangerous move to their reputation and if NI ends up with a worse deal, after being offered a really good one, they weaken their party. If NI would be better off in the EU after DUP driving us to a worse deal, it gives strength to a United Ireland vote.

Accept the current deal. While the backstop aligns NI towards the EU, it still keeps NI in the UK. Yes, it weakens their position on paper, but it can also strengthen their position when we consider the implications of other outcomes, which most certainly weaken their position. And if we consider the benefits to NI with T Mays current proposal, it weakens the United Ireland option. Only hard line nationalists would vote it in, as all the regular Joe's are happy with the status quo. NI interfacing with both GB and EU is good for NI, and as a result, there is much less reason, less appetite, for people to want to join Ireland, as the current deal keeps us in the UK, but also partly in the EU.

The only thing that works for the DUP is to either back the current deal, or to gamble that something better can be arranged. If we get a new PM for example, DUP simply don't know if that will end up being good for them or bad for them....it's a throw of the dice. The walls are closing in on the DUP right now, and T May has played a political masterstroke to be honest, in turning DUPs perceived strength into a position of weakness. She absolutely knew that NI would back her deal, and when one of the biggest supporters of DUP, the Ulster farmers Union are calling on them to change their stance, it's difficult times for DUP.
T May has anticipated this all along, she's sharper than many give her credit for. So while everyone is absolutely assuming the DUP will vote against the deal, I wouldn't be so sure. A few days in politics is a lifetime at the minute.
There is still time for some spin, some theatre, which may end up helping the DUP back T Mays deal to help them save face.....Or they may well indeed continue on their current course of self destruction or gambling...time will tell.

[Coolbanana]

Not-The-Messiah said:

And what would have happened if remain won and the EU changed some part of itself, would you be calling for another vote?

If Remain had won and the EU had pledged reform, I personally would not be calling for another vote - I don't do so now as I am not wanting to vote, I simply support the Democratic process that allows for such to take place.

Similarly, if Remain had won, I would respect the absolute right for Leave to continue campaigning in the hope of another vote down the line where they might win - these are the basic rights afforded to anyone living in a Democracy; you can request and campaign for change as much as you like. Whether or not you get the change you want or even the granting of a Referendum to vote in is another matter entirely.

Not-The-Messiah said:

You say you that you believe leave is split and if there is another referendum remain would win.

You are basing you opinion on how things stand now. The leave side have only been arguing against a second referendum not another in out choice. If another vote is called this would switch and full on campaigning and arguing would begin.

The remain side will have the evidence of 2 years of project fear and the shambles the negotiations have been although saying that, that argument could and will be used on both sides.

I predicted the split at the very beginning if you read through the 1st Threads on this topic. It was entirely predictable. You maintain that the Leave side is only arguing against another Referendum but I respectfully disagree with you - several Polls from different sources show otherwise. You can use Google to discover this. There is clear evidence that some Leavers would prefer to now Remain if they cannot get the good deal with the EU that they expected. The numbers are, of course, unknown, and for this reason Government has to be very careful and not grant another Referendum without very good reasons for doing so; i.e. clear evidence a large group want such who previously voted Leave. Hard to quantify given that it seems clear a majority of Leavers would prefer all out, WTO.

Not-The-Messiah said:

The leave side.
Voting to now return to the EU with our tails between our legs will be a complete national humiliation. We will inevitable get the gloating and smug reactions from the likes of the French and Germans well all of the EU actually.
We will clearly demonstrate that we are no longer a independent nation and need the EU and it's bureaucrats, politicians to make many of our decisions for us. As we are incapable of doing it ourselves.
The rest of the world will see us as some pointless nobody incapable of sorting out our own affairs nevermind anyone else's.
It's a attack on democracy itself by actually even having this vote without enacting the first and so on.

Indeed, there would be an element of humiliation - but it is arguable if it would be any worse than that already inflicted. Of course there will be some smugness from our European friends but you would have to be very immature and not terribly bright not to put up with it if what is best for the National Interest was at stake.

Much of what you worry about above has already happened - the UK has made an absolute shambles of Brexit thus far and the R.O.W has watched and learned that the UK is fair game when it is disorganised. The R.O.W has witnessed major cracks in UK Parliament and will have already seen weaknesses to exploit in any future negotiations. That cat is out of the bag, too late now.

In so far as needing the EU, you are merely voicing what we already know - you do not like the EU and want complete independence. Millions do not agree with you and do not share your views on how the relationship with the EU works; they do feel the UK is still Sovereign but chooses to work closely with its neighbours for the betterment of all in Europe.

Opposing views that led to the Referendum. We know this. Remainers are unlikely to change, similarly Leavers with your outlook. However, both groups need to accept that in a Democracy, they can each campaign to get their way.

Not-The-Messiah said:

You think it will be a vote driven by pragmatic rational argument about the implications and affects of leaving the EU.
It won't be it will be a argument on principles. National pride and patriotism, the unwillingness to be humiliated. And are people willing to take a possible financial hit for such things?

If I was going to put money down on the winner I know which one it would be on.

I have never stated such - you are projecting.

When the UK has another Referendum on the EU issue - and it will in my opinion, if not soon, later - the two sides will prey upon peoples bias, politics, patriotism and gullibility - as they did before.

However, one would hope that the last 2 years have taught most people that they need to delve deeper into the issues to find the truth and not to take Politicians word for it - we all know they can be very deceptive.

Anyway, you clearly are convinced Leave would reinforce their Ref. 2016 victory and that is fine. Others are entitled to believe - to hope - for a different result. They are also entitled to campaign for such and if they sway the Government into allowing them to have another go, there is absolutely nothing technically or legally wrong with that.

I support both Leave and Remains rights to campaign for what they believe in and to enact change through campaigning as often as they wish to; they have that fundamental right.

At present, TM is showing great resilience towards Leavers such as yourself. There is every chance that Parliament will not throw her deal out simply because most are Remainers at heart and if they see EU Lite as being better than No Deal WTO and, crucially, do not wish to test the Will of the People again for fear that you may be correct, then they will push it through as is with the hope of cementing it over time into close EU ties.

Yes, Leavers such as yourself will be very upset but Parliament and Government would argue that the UK is no longer listed as a Member of the EU and so have delivered. They may well choose to take the negative hits from Leavers such as yourselves come General Elections believing that a majority will concede and just want to move past this sorry episode and get back to Conservatives vs Labour.

I agree with you that complete Leave would be preferable to EU Lite but we should not underestimate TM or Parliament; they may yet believe her deal is the best of the 3 options available in terms of long term Political damage (if not necessarily Country).

I support Remain in principle, you are a strong Supporter of Leave. We each know our respective positions well as we do all PH contributors to these long debates. We have the result of a Referendum and the Government has tried to deliver on that, to varying degrees of satisfaction for many different reasons we have all discussed.

Pragmatically, what do we all want for the UK?

Is it that you believe in your position so strongly that you want to enforce your Referendum win even if it means disenfranchising most of the UK - that is, that even if you suspect there is a chance a new majority might exist for Remain following 2 years of Brexit new information, you would disregard that as 'tough' and want to go with what a minority want? Hardly a moral stance if so, but I get that for many, it is a tribal thing, one whereby the interests of the majority are not really what is important, so long as your faction gets its way. Our Politicians, after all, encourage this to a degree.

I suppose I am looking at this from a perfect stand point, not being affected either way albeit having a preference for my birth country in principle. So I am viewing it all from the perspective of what is morally correct, rather than what the Peacock infighting and dastardly Politics can get away with.

I would like to see clear evidence that if the UK leaves with no deal, it does so with the consent of a majority - and I mean a majority now, not from a vote that took place 2 years ago, that everyone agrees was terrible, and one that left many people uninformed. After all that has happened, if people still want to Leave or Remain, they cannot claim to be uninformed now.

Of course, what I would like to see, is immaterial - it is what you and your fellow UK residents want to see that is important and I sincerely hope that you all can agree true Democracy was served when all this is over.

[cerbfan]

braddo said:

gooner1 said:

That's fairly obvious seeing as how our fish quotas are likely to increase.
Apart from the fact that it's not only Eire and the UK that produces meat.

Do you realise that 75% of the UK's fish catch is exported to the EU?

So if we get a bigger share of the catch, we are only going to want to sell it to the EU. Are you understanding there are two sides to a negotiation yet?

And that if one side is 10 times bigger than the other, that the bigger side just might have an advantage in the negotiations?

Less and less all the time, I live in Peterhead and know a lot of the owners of the largest fishing fleets and they are air freighting more month on month to China now as the percentage of middle class grow there and they want high quality goods.

[Murph7355]

Mrr T said:

jsf said:

PurpleMoonlight said:

The landlord for a commercial property letting can often effectively not terminate it.

Define effectively.

Show me a contract you have signed that you cant terminate.

To be pedantic most contracts do not have termination clauses because they cover specific actions. In ongoing contracts its advisable to have a termination clause but it not always possible. For example some csd contracts do not have any termination clause.

The draft deal does have a termination clause it just the termination must be by mutual consent. That's not that unusual.

There is not a single trade deal currently in existence that has the same sort of arrangement as far as I'm aware.

And anyone entering into any contract without a very clearly defined exit clause is dumb (I'm ignoring the marriage "contract" in case my OH ever reads PH ).

[PurpleMoonlight]

Murph7355 said:

There is not a single trade deal currently in existence that has the same sort of arrangement as far as I'm aware.

And anyone entering into any contract without a very clearly defined exit clause is dumb (I'm ignoring the marriage "contract" in case my OH ever reads PH ).

Does the EU have a similar trade agreement with anyone else to that proposed with the UK?

[anonymous-user]

PurpleMoonlight said:

Does the EU have a similar trade agreement with anyone else to that proposed with the UK?

There is no proposed trade deal.

What we are discussing is the withdrawal agreement.

This WA has the ability to permanently tie the UK into the CU and all the rules of that, both current and future.

What we do know from the future framework is that the backstop, which is CU membership, is to form the basis of the future FTA.

So you need to ask who is in the CU if you want to look for something similar.

If we sign this WA, we will be the only country in the world who cant leave the CU unilaterally.

[PurpleMoonlight]

jsf said:

There is no proposed trade deal.

What we are discussing is the withdrawal agreement.

This WA has the ability to permanently tie the UK into the CU and all the rules of that, both current and future.

What we do know from the future framework is that the backstop, which is CU membership, is to form the basis of the future FTA.

So you need to ask who is in the CU if you want to look for something similar.

If we sign this WA, we will be the only country in the world who cant leave the CU unilaterally.

You are mistaken, we are not remaining in the CU.

[gooner1]

jsf said:

PurpleMoonlight said:

Does the EU have a similar trade agreement with anyone else to that proposed with the UK?

There is no proposed trade deal.

What we are discussing is the withdrawal agreement.

This WA has the ability to permanently tie the UK into the CU and all the rules of that, both current and future.

What we do know from the future framework is that the backstop, which is CU membership, is to form the basis of the future FTA.

So you need to ask who is in the CU if you want to look for something similar.

If we sign this WA, we will be the only country in the world who cant leave the CU unilaterally.

And that, my dear PM, is not leaving, it's more like a "promise" to let us leave when and if the EU decide to.

[PurpleMoonlight]

gooner1 said:

And that, my dear PM, is not leaving, it's more like a "promise" to let us leave when and if the EU decide to.

You are mistaken too.

[gooner1]

PurpleMoonlight said:

gooner1 said:

And that, my dear PM, is not leaving, it's more like a "promise" to let us leave when and if the EU decide to.

You are mistaken too.

I sincerely hope I am, but on the matter of being able to leave re this proposed
backdrop legislation, I don't think I am. However.....

[dazwalsh]

gooner1 said:

PurpleMoonlight said:

gooner1 said:

And that, my dear PM, is not leaving, it's more like a "promise" to let us leave when and if the EU decide to.

You are mistaken too.

I sincerely hope I am, but on the matter of being able to leave re this proposed
backdrop legislation, I don't think I am. However.....

Have to look at this from the other side too, the EU will not want us to suddenly up sticks and ps off as and when we please. If the arbitration is an independent body then i would be happy to go with the deal. As we all digest the deal and consider the alternatives i think it will gain a lot of support.

Over the course of the last week my appreciation of Mrs May has increased tenfold (was never really a fan of hers), she has a vision and to be fair to her is sticking to her guns when half the caninet is throwing their toys out of the pram with no alternate or better plan. It has become clear just how difficult the negotiations have been, and she appears to have put every ounce of energy into them.

If thats truely the best deal that is available then a change of leader, general election or a peoples vote (fking hate that term) wont make a blind bit of difference to it, so we must now make the decision of this deal or no deal.

Also those who think this mess can be reversed and we go back to pre jun 16 are a few pennies short of a quid. That ship has sailed a long time ago.

Edited by dazwalsh on Saturday 17th November 14:39

[PurpleMoonlight]

dazwalsh said:

Have to look at this from the other side too, the EU will not want us to suddenly up sticks and ps off as and when we please. If the arbitration is an independent body then i would be happy to go with the deal. As we all digest the deal and consider the alternatives i think it will gain a lot of support.

Over the course of the last week my appreciation of Mrs May has increased tenfold (was never really a fan of hers), she has a vision and to be fair to her is sticking to her guns when half the caninet is throwing their toys out of the pram with no alternate or better plan. It has become clear just how difficult the negotiations have been, and she appears to have put every ounce of energy into them.

If thats truely the best deal that is available then a change of leader, general election or a peoples vote (fking hate that term) wont make a blind bit of difference to it, so we must now make the decision of this deal or no deal.

Also those who think this mess can be reversed and we go back to pre jun 16 are a few pennies short of a quid. That ship has sailed a long time ago.

Edited by dazwalsh on Saturday 17th November 14:39

I agree with this.

If the UK want the EU to do something that they have never done with anyone else, then the UK may have to do something they would not do with anyone else.

Both parties would have the same difficulty withdrawing from it once implemented.

[Mrr T]

gooner1 said:

PurpleMoonlight said:

gooner1 said:

And that, my dear PM, is not leaving, it's more like a "promise" to let us leave when and if the EU decide to.

You are mistaken too.

I sincerely hope I am, but on the matter of being able to leave re this proposed
backdrop legislation, I don't think I am. However.....

Your not wrong its a terrible deal. Essentially making the UK a vessel state for as long as the EU decide. Well done leave voters your total unwillingness to accept any compromises to get your cake, and unicorn brexit caused this. You must be so proud.

[StevieBee]

dazwalsh said:

Over the course of the last week my appreciation of Mrs May has increased tenfold (was never really a fan of hers), she has a vision and to be fair to her is sticking to her guns when half the caninet is throwing their toys out of the pram with no alternate or better plan. It has become clear just how difficult the negotiations have been, and she appears to have put every ounce of energy into them.

It's an unpopular opinion but one I share.

I'm appalled at those ministers who've resigned. That action is less motivated by principles and everything to do with political power plays. On a matter such as this, that is appalling action IMO.

I think people forget that the very nature of negotiation means to arrive at mutually agreeable compromises - not get everything you want.

I voted to remain (cautiously) but had the deal been struck and presented to the public at the time of the vote, I may well have given leave far greater consideration.

[Troubleatmill]

PurpleMoonlight said:

gooner1 said:

And that, my dear PM, is not leaving, it's more like a "promise" to let us leave when and if the EU decide to.

You are mistaken too.

If the UK representatives on the joint committee decide "The UK should leave within 6 months"
Can the EU representatives on the joint committee decide - "The UK cannot leave?"

[gooner1]

Mrr T said:

gooner1 said:

PurpleMoonlight said:

gooner1 said:

And that, my dear PM, is not leaving, it's more like a "promise" to let us leave when and if the EU decide to.

You are mistaken too.

I sincerely hope I am, but on the matter of being able to leave re this proposed
backdrop legislation, I don't think I am. However.....

Your not wrong its a terrible deal. Essentially making the UK a vessel state for as long as the EU decide. Well done leave voters your total unwillingness to accept any compromises to get your cake, and unicorn brexit caused this. You must be so proud.

At the risk of(not) being wrong again, remind me who are the instigators of this proposal, not a deal, unless I'm very much mistaken(not) again are they not Remainers?

[PurpleMoonlight]

Troubleatmill said:

If the UK representatives on the joint committee decide "The UK should leave within 6 months"
Can the EU representatives on the joint committee decide - "The UK cannot leave?"

I don't know the specific timscales for seeking to leave the backstop new UK:EU CU I'm afraid.

My point was we are not remaining in the EU CU.

[Russian Troll Bot]

Verhofstadt losing his temper about member states not wanting to transfer their sovereignty and powers

https://twitter.com/P_G_Thompson/status/1063793805...


But I didn't think that was what the EU was about...............?

[Mrr T]

gooner1 said:

At the risk of(not) being wrong again, remind me who are the instigators of this proposal, not a deal, unless I'm very much mistaken(not) again are they not Remainers?

Where where team leave when the complex questions where being answered. Mostly resigned and moaning they wanted cake and unicorns. Or claiming no deal was an option. Some such as Grove and to my surprise Fox have stuck it out.