How do we think EU negotiations will go? (Vol 3)
Discussion
Do you lot ever muse about what Brexit looks like from the perspective of the British politicians?
On one hand the EU is a great provider of job opportunities - get a job in Brussels and you’ll be well paid and have a well assured retirement, as demonstrated by Kinnock. But the logical result of increasingly centralised political power in Brussels is that the countries that make up the EU should require less politicians at home. So far, I am not aware of EU countries reducing the number of politicians at home to make up for their reduced responsibility for policy and management, but that is the way it should have been in my opinion.
For an older politician who’s retirement is already assured, he/she can react purely on the basis of ideology or in line with the leanings of their electors. For a younger British politician, Brexit can mean increased job security at home (we will continue to need just as many once outside the EU),but with the loss of the Brussels safety net for those no hopers who have lost all national credibility.
In all the discussions of gravy trains, turkeys not voting for Christmas and so on, I have not seen a clear dissertation on the potential effects of Brexit on British politicians employment. Would you trust them to put such considerations out of their minds when voting one way or another on this issue?
On one hand the EU is a great provider of job opportunities - get a job in Brussels and you’ll be well paid and have a well assured retirement, as demonstrated by Kinnock. But the logical result of increasingly centralised political power in Brussels is that the countries that make up the EU should require less politicians at home. So far, I am not aware of EU countries reducing the number of politicians at home to make up for their reduced responsibility for policy and management, but that is the way it should have been in my opinion.
For an older politician who’s retirement is already assured, he/she can react purely on the basis of ideology or in line with the leanings of their electors. For a younger British politician, Brexit can mean increased job security at home (we will continue to need just as many once outside the EU),but with the loss of the Brussels safety net for those no hopers who have lost all national credibility.
In all the discussions of gravy trains, turkeys not voting for Christmas and so on, I have not seen a clear dissertation on the potential effects of Brexit on British politicians employment. Would you trust them to put such considerations out of their minds when voting one way or another on this issue?
sidicks said:
Ghibli said:
Take a look at the economy of places like China and India? Think what might be happening outside of the EU/UK
Still no evidence then? As I suspected.Feel free to keep dragging this out, rather than simply admit you were posting straw man nonsense.
sidicks said:
BigMon said:
Out of interest, which bits don't you agree with?
Perhaps you missed my update?I'm not having a go btw, just genuinely interested which bits you disagreed with.
BigMon said:
I've reread the last couple of pages and can't see which bits of CoolBanana's post you disagreed with?
I'm not having a go btw, just genuinely interested which bits you disagreed with.
I'm not having a go btw, just genuinely interested which bits you disagreed with.
Sidicks said:
If the EU had shown any willingness to reform, then Remain would have won the referendum and this would quite probably have been the best outcome.
i.e. staying in and trying to reform from within wasn't / isn't a credible option. A vote to remain would have inevitably been seen as a vote for 'more EU'.Edited by sidicks on Sunday 22 July 18:47
I see John Major has put his oar in again on the Andrew Marr show.....
He said that less well off people are going to be worst hit by a no deal and that ordinary everyday people really are not political....
How an ex-primeminister can be so completely out of touch with the people of the UK is beyond me...
He said that less well off people are going to be worst hit by a no deal and that ordinary everyday people really are not political....
How an ex-primeminister can be so completely out of touch with the people of the UK is beyond me...
sidicks said:
I don't agree with all of it, but by far the most sensible post I've read from you on this topic.
If the EU had shown any willingness to reform, then Remain would have won the referendum and this would quite probably have been the best outcome.
I agree, the EU was getting a bit too uppity for its own good however sadly, while I actually quite liked Cameron as PM, he was not strong enough on the World stage. If the EU had shown any willingness to reform, then Remain would have won the referendum and this would quite probably have been the best outcome.
Edited by sidicks on Sunday 22 July 18:31
The UK needed to work more effectively with the countries where reform was most desired rather than represent itself alone; present a united front of several EU countries and force reform - numbers would inevitably lead to a democratic solution regardless of any EU Leadership desires for control to the contrary.
Brexit has forced the EU into self-defence mode; survival mode. It will prevail because it has to. We have seen other populist uprisings against aspects of the 4 Freedoms etc and these could have been used to create powerful voices; Referendums by Nations aimed at democratically informing the EU that if reforms were not made, more than one country would leave, not just one. All together. The EU could not survive that.
Now, the co-ordination behind the scenes and the Political strength to enact the aforementioned is immense but in the absence of a realistic Plan - and certainly not the garbage White Paper we have been presented with just before we are to actually Leave - I would have loved to have seen it attempted. Sure, it would have taken some time and that time could have also been used to create good alternative Leave scenarios and options in the event that the EU stubbornly resisted regardless.
I just do not think, we, the British Public - have instructed our Governments correctly, nor do I believe have our Governments represented us in dealing with our concerns properly - and it continues.
Edited by Coolbanana on Sunday 22 July 18:51
Edited by Coolbanana on Sunday 22 July 18:54
Coolbanana said:
Good post. 
I understand your optimism and hope that you are proven correct. I do wish a concrete Plan had been prepared, accounting for all the different scenarios both Remainer's and the EU would come up with, demonstrating various options and possible, realistic solutions and outcomes. If that had been the case, Team Leave could have placated many Remainer's and shown a vision they could get excited about and on-board with.
It isn't that as a Remainer, I and many like me, believe the Sun shines out of the EU's backside and they can do no wrong, far from it, we want to squeeze them for the best deal we can get for the UK - continuously. We appreciate the flaws and the concerns however before we leap, we stubbornly insist upon a Plan we could get behind for the long-haul and at least a decent mini-bar in the lifeboat for the short-term, if nothing else.
What we are instead witnessing, is what we feared and predicted - a Political mess, weak Negotiators and no grand Plan. Better to stay in until one is devised or if one cannot be devised, work from within to reform even if it takes decades.
Similarly - a good post there CoolBanana.I understand your optimism and hope that you are proven correct. I do wish a concrete Plan had been prepared, accounting for all the different scenarios both Remainer's and the EU would come up with, demonstrating various options and possible, realistic solutions and outcomes. If that had been the case, Team Leave could have placated many Remainer's and shown a vision they could get excited about and on-board with.
It isn't that as a Remainer, I and many like me, believe the Sun shines out of the EU's backside and they can do no wrong, far from it, we want to squeeze them for the best deal we can get for the UK - continuously. We appreciate the flaws and the concerns however before we leap, we stubbornly insist upon a Plan we could get behind for the long-haul and at least a decent mini-bar in the lifeboat for the short-term, if nothing else.
What we are instead witnessing, is what we feared and predicted - a Political mess, weak Negotiators and no grand Plan. Better to stay in until one is devised or if one cannot be devised, work from within to reform even if it takes decades.
Perhaps Strong & Stable Teresa should have held her nerve longer before triggering Art.50 notification - which would have allowed for better planning.
The EU were, quite rightly from their perspective, keen to not get drawn into unauthorised discussions before A50 notice was provided - but I would assume from the amount of pre-meetings and business which tends to get down over coffee before meetings actually tAke place - this should still have been kept open to reality check the relevant positions.
The EU also set the tempo - ie No talk about future trade allowed until the other bits (perversely including the future trading relationship across the island of Ireland)
So - not having an effective position before launching A50 and then completely nausing up the GE and the government’s majority was perhaps the worst example of political decision making I can recall.
Hey Ho...
sidicks said:
BigMon said:
I've reread the last couple of pages and can't see which bits of CoolBanana's post you disagreed with?
Sidicks said:
If the EU had shown any willingness to reform, then Remain would have won the referendum and this would quite probably have been the best outcome.
i.e. staying in and trying to reform from within wasn't / isn't a credible option. A vote to remain would have inevitably been seen as a vote for 'more EU'.One has to be thankful to Cameron for being such a failure (at least twice) and for presenting the UK with such an opportunity.
Skywalker said:
Similarly - a good post there CoolBanana.
Perhaps Strong & Stable Teresa should have held her nerve longer before triggering Art.50 notification - which would have allowed for better planning.
The EU were, quite rightly from their perspective, keen to not get drawn into unauthorised discussions before A50 notice was provided - but I would assume from the amount of pre-meetings and business which tends to get down over coffee before meetings actually tAke place - this should still have been kept open to reality check the relevant positions.
The EU also set the tempo - ie No talk about future trade allowed until the other bits (perversely including the future trading relationship across the island of Ireland)
So - not having an effective position before launching A50 and then completely nausing up the GE and the government’s majority was perhaps the worst example of political decision making I can recall.
Hey Ho...
Agreed.Perhaps Strong & Stable Teresa should have held her nerve longer before triggering Art.50 notification - which would have allowed for better planning.
The EU were, quite rightly from their perspective, keen to not get drawn into unauthorised discussions before A50 notice was provided - but I would assume from the amount of pre-meetings and business which tends to get down over coffee before meetings actually tAke place - this should still have been kept open to reality check the relevant positions.
The EU also set the tempo - ie No talk about future trade allowed until the other bits (perversely including the future trading relationship across the island of Ireland)
So - not having an effective position before launching A50 and then completely nausing up the GE and the government’s majority was perhaps the worst example of political decision making I can recall.
Hey Ho...
What I was getting at a few posts above was wondering if anyone is genuinely happy with where the UK negotiations are at the moment and, if they are, what are the reasons for their optimism?
don'tbesilly said:
What are these series of events? (list will do)
How many are there? (your list should confirm)
What makes them unlikely to occur?
Do they (events) all need to happen at the same time for them to be successful?
I’m only reporting what is accepted by the leading Brexit loons, namely that a successful Brexit requires at least the following:How many are there? (your list should confirm)
What makes them unlikely to occur?
Do they (events) all need to happen at the same time for them to be successful?
(1) Trade with the EU to be largely unaffected.
This is about 50/50, at best.
(2) Increased trade opportunities with other major economies, bringing substantial benefits.
This is unlikely. Most major economies have ruled out any step change, and the remaining candidates are unrealistic.
(3) The Conservatives to stay in power.
Hugely unlikely.
(4) The Government to implement a low-spend, low tax reorganisation of the economy to make it more competitive.
Vanishingly unlikely, especially given that all the political talk from both parties is of yet more spending and a focus on dead-end manufacturing and other uncompetitive industries.
Far more likely is that the first few months and years of Brexit will involve a fairly nasty recession that will bring Labour to power, resulting in a clusterf
k of high taxes, massive borrowing and no attempt to exploit the opportunities of independence. Two lost decades would be my best guess.ORD said:
I’m only reporting what is accepted by the leading Brexit loons, namely that a successful Brexit requires at least the following:
Evidence required.ORD said:
(1) Trade with the EU to be largely unaffected.
This is about 50/50, at best.
(2) Increased trade opportunities with other major economies, bringing substantial benefits.
This is unlikely. Most major economies have ruled out any step change, and the remaining candidates are unrealistic.
(3) The Conservatives to stay in power.
Hugely unlikely.
(4) The Government to implement a low-spend, low tax reorganisation of the economy to make it more competitive.
Vanishingly unlikely, especially given that all the political talk from both parties is of yet more spending and a focus on dead-end manufacturing and other uncompetitive industries.
Far more likely is that the first few months and years of Brexit will involve a fairly nasty recession that will bring Labour to power, resulting in a clusterfk of high taxes, massive borrowing and no attempt to exploit the opportunities of independence. Two lost decades would be my best guess.
I think your 'guess' is bThis is about 50/50, at best.
(2) Increased trade opportunities with other major economies, bringing substantial benefits.
This is unlikely. Most major economies have ruled out any step change, and the remaining candidates are unrealistic.
(3) The Conservatives to stay in power.
Hugely unlikely.
(4) The Government to implement a low-spend, low tax reorganisation of the economy to make it more competitive.
Vanishingly unlikely, especially given that all the political talk from both parties is of yet more spending and a focus on dead-end manufacturing and other uncompetitive industries.
Far more likely is that the first few months and years of Brexit will involve a fairly nasty recession that will bring Labour to power, resulting in a clusterf
k of high taxes, massive borrowing and no attempt to exploit the opportunities of independence. Two lost decades would be my best guess.ks.Edited by sidicks on Sunday 22 July 19:05
The problems with the EU. The protectionism, the contempt for democracy, the itch to centralise and micro manage, the insistence that individuals must subordinate their interests to the good of the 'project' which is in effect the state, are not minor details that crept into badly drafted paperwork and can be amended.
They are hard wired. They are what the EU is for. Part of a continental European Dirigiste tradition that goes back to 18th century Prussia. A belief, so well demonstrated by many of the Remainers on here, that the 'little people' are too stupid and emotional to be allowed a say and a small group of wise officials must make all the decisions.
They are hard wired. They are what the EU is for. Part of a continental European Dirigiste tradition that goes back to 18th century Prussia. A belief, so well demonstrated by many of the Remainers on here, that the 'little people' are too stupid and emotional to be allowed a say and a small group of wise officials must make all the decisions.
bhstewie said:
hstewie said:ORD said:
It’s that kind of attitude that I simply cannot understand.
‘Let’s go back to how it used to be!’
It used to be thoroughly crap. The UK has no record of post-war economic prosperity outside the EU. It was an absolute basket case of an economy.
People always need a scapegoat.‘Let’s go back to how it used to be!’
It used to be thoroughly crap. The UK has no record of post-war economic prosperity outside the EU. It was an absolute basket case of an economy.
People love a good scapegoat
ORD said:
don'tbesilly said:
What are these series of events? (list will do)
How many are there? (your list should confirm)
What makes them unlikely to occur?
Do they (events) all need to happen at the same time for them to be successful?
I’m only reporting what is accepted by the leading Brexit loons, namely that a successful Brexit requires at least the following:How many are there? (your list should confirm)
What makes them unlikely to occur?
Do they (events) all need to happen at the same time for them to be successful?
(1) Trade with the EU to be largely unaffected.
This is about 50/50, at best.
(2) Increased trade opportunities with other major economies, bringing substantial benefits.
This is unlikely. Most major economies have ruled out any step change, and the remaining candidates are unrealistic.
(3) The Conservatives to stay in power.
Hugely unlikely.
(4) The Government to implement a low-spend, low tax reorganisation of the economy to make it more competitive.
Vanishingly unlikely, especially given that all the political talk from both parties is of yet more spending and a focus on dead-end manufacturing and other uncompetitive industries.
Far more likely is that the first few months and years of Brexit will involve a fairly nasty recession that will bring Labour to power, resulting in a clusterf
k of high taxes, massive borrowing and no attempt to exploit the opportunities of independence. Two lost decades would be my best guess.All you have offered are your own opinions to counter the opinions of the brexit 'loons'.
Now I'm sure you think you're opinion is of far more importance and has far more credibility than the brexit 'loons' you refer to,
however can you tell me just why I should believe you, over the brexit loons, who to me are possibly better positioned and experienced than someone who just refers to those as 'loons' whose opinions differ to yours.
What position do you hold in Govt? How many years experience do you have in the office you keep?
Dr Jekyll said:
The problems with the EU. The protectionism, the contempt for democracy, the itch to centralise and micro manage, the insistence that individuals must subordinate their interests to the good of the 'project' which is in effect the state, are not minor details that crept into badly drafted paperwork and can be amended.
They are hard wired. They are what the EU is for. Part of a continental European Dirigiste tradition that goes back to 18th century Prussia. A belief, so well demonstrated by many of the Remainers on here, that the 'little people' are too stupid and emotional to be allowed a say and a small group of wise officials must make all the decisions.
I agree with that - that the EU don’t act to resolve a drunk being at the helm typifies the problemThey are hard wired. They are what the EU is for. Part of a continental European Dirigiste tradition that goes back to 18th century Prussia. A belief, so well demonstrated by many of the Remainers on here, that the 'little people' are too stupid and emotional to be allowed a say and a small group of wise officials must make all the decisions.
B'stard Child said:
Dr Jekyll said:
The problems with the EU. The protectionism, the contempt for democracy, the itch to centralise and micro manage, the insistence that individuals must subordinate their interests to the good of the 'project' which is in effect the state, are not minor details that crept into badly drafted paperwork and can be amended.
They are hard wired. They are what the EU is for. Part of a continental European Dirigiste tradition that goes back to 18th century Prussia. A belief, so well demonstrated by many of the Remainers on here, that the 'little people' are too stupid and emotional to be allowed a say and a small group of wise officials must make all the decisions.
I agree with that - that the EU don’t act to resolve a drunk being at the helm typifies the problemThey are hard wired. They are what the EU is for. Part of a continental European Dirigiste tradition that goes back to 18th century Prussia. A belief, so well demonstrated by many of the Remainers on here, that the 'little people' are too stupid and emotional to be allowed a say and a small group of wise officials must make all the decisions.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rVrpYTZMBcM
Vanden Saab said:
I see John Major has put his oar in again on the Andrew Marr show.....
He said that less well off people are going to be worst hit by a no deal and that ordinary everyday people really are not political....
How an ex-primeminister can be so completely out of touch with the people of the UK is beyond me...
I'd suggest he's bang on tbh.He said that less well off people are going to be worst hit by a no deal and that ordinary everyday people really are not political....
How an ex-primeminister can be so completely out of touch with the people of the UK is beyond me...
They will be the hardest hit of any negative impact and most everyday people are clueless politically.
Just wondering...all hypothetical...
I wish Cameron had taken the Referendum result to the EU and told them bluntly that they had to deliver reforms that would appease the majority of those who voted Leave or Leave the UK would.
I wish then, behind the scenes he had instructed a Negotiation Team to work through all possible scenarios for Leave with an Action Plan - which was then agreed through Parliament going through all necessary processes which would not only have better prepared the UK, but sent a no bluff message to the EU.
Then had the EU not moved sufficiently, Team Leave would have been in a position to invoke Article 50 and go in hard and strong against the EU.
I could have got behind that.
Instead, all that happened was that the EU, like Cameron et al - and me - didn't believe a Leave vote would prevail. They called out the UK Electorate and lost. Team Leave were taken by surprise. They had no workable plan. Political chaos ensued. The EU stood back and dictated what they would and wouldn't accept. Hard Leaver's rejoice at this, good for them, but I do not believe that there are a majority of Hard Leavers which means the failure of the Conservatives and Parliament will lead to a minority getting what they want, while a majority are unhappy. Not a healthy situation for any Democracy.
What will then have to happen to avoid repeated Referendums and Political turmoil, is for Hard Leave 'No Deal' to actually prove to have little or no negative effect - indeed, a positive one would make everyone humbly concede. Big risk though.
I wish Cameron had taken the Referendum result to the EU and told them bluntly that they had to deliver reforms that would appease the majority of those who voted Leave or Leave the UK would.
I wish then, behind the scenes he had instructed a Negotiation Team to work through all possible scenarios for Leave with an Action Plan - which was then agreed through Parliament going through all necessary processes which would not only have better prepared the UK, but sent a no bluff message to the EU.
Then had the EU not moved sufficiently, Team Leave would have been in a position to invoke Article 50 and go in hard and strong against the EU.
I could have got behind that.
Instead, all that happened was that the EU, like Cameron et al - and me - didn't believe a Leave vote would prevail. They called out the UK Electorate and lost. Team Leave were taken by surprise. They had no workable plan. Political chaos ensued. The EU stood back and dictated what they would and wouldn't accept. Hard Leaver's rejoice at this, good for them, but I do not believe that there are a majority of Hard Leavers which means the failure of the Conservatives and Parliament will lead to a minority getting what they want, while a majority are unhappy. Not a healthy situation for any Democracy.
What will then have to happen to avoid repeated Referendums and Political turmoil, is for Hard Leave 'No Deal' to actually prove to have little or no negative effect - indeed, a positive one would make everyone humbly concede. Big risk though.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff