How do we think EU negotiations will go? (Vol 9)

[Tuna]

jonnyb said:

And this is the main problem for me. At some point our country has to come back together. Which is one reason a hard brexit on WTO terms would be a disaster, how would that heal our country? 17.4m people voted to leave, but 16.2m voted to stay, and we all have to live together afterwards.

Sigh. That's completely misunderstanding what a "hard" brexit is. It does not define our eventual relationship with the EU, nor how we treat immigration, trading or any of the other things that both sides fret about. WTO rules are simply a different kind of (internationally recognised) backstop that allow us to get on with negotiating in good faith.

At that point, we can set up any level of co-operation with the EU we wish. We can have votes on each individual item if you want. We can petition our politicians, and have the discussion out in public about what sort of a nation we want to be.

What people keep on forgetting is that Mays Deal or No Deal are both the start of another two or three years of negotiations with the EU - except that in the case of May's Deal we have our hands tied.

[Dr Jekyll]

biggles330d said:

As an unashamed remain voter, I'd agree with the above. I didn't vote for it, I don't want it and don't like it, but we choose to leave the EU club utterly of our own choice and against the advise at the time of pretty much every political, business and academic commentator.
We followed the pied piper Farage, Gove and Johnson and made our bed.

All the way through the EU has been crystal clear that you can't have all the benefits and none of the pain. You can't cherry pick what you want, but so many of our politician for whatever reason seem to have total belief that we can and haven't made plans for the reality of this.

Not so long ago the EU very clearly demonstrated - rightly or wrongly - to the Greeks that it has to swollow a bitter pill to fix itself and endure much hardship as a result. Why we thought they wouldn't take the same view with us baffles me.

Ah yes, the old 'we must stay in their club because they are vindictive sods who will be nasty to us' argument.

[psi310398]

crankedup said:

I agree that my comment regarding how constituencies voted had no bearing on a referendum result.My point that I was trying to make was simply that MPs have a constituency for which they represent.In my constituency the referendum result was around 55% leave/ 40 something remain.This is used by myself to see how my MP reacts to her constituents voting pattern. Others can and have reacted the same, how else are we supposed to ‘oversee’ our MPs performances.?

Interesting news just in.

Nick Boles, the Conservative MP Grantham and Stamford, has resigned his membership of his local constituency association, saying:

“I am not willing to do what would be necessary to restore a reasonable working relationship with a group of people whose values and views are so much at odds with my own” I will continue to take Tory whip “if it is offered to me on acceptable terms.”

So a Conservative MP who knows the game is up and that he won't be fighting the next election as a Conservative candidate. The first of many?

[Vanden Saab]

jonnyb said:

You say that but the remainers in Mays party have consistently voted for Mays deal. Its the ERG and the DUP that are against it.
But I agree, as a remainer Mays deal is one I can stomach in the spirit of compromise and division healing.

Is Dominic grieve a member of the erg or the DUP now? How did I miss that...

[FiF]

Elysium said:

FiF said:

Problem is another referendum isn't going to heal the divide.






More analysis here, behind paywall https://digitaledition.telegraph.co.uk/editions/ed...

In the short term it will break the deadlock and confirm what the majority want.

That won’t make the minority position any easier, but over time we will at least be able to get on with other things.

Parliament deciding to delay for no clear reason, reluctantly leaving with no-deal or holding their nose to take a bad deal, without checking with us to see what we want, will make things worse.

Is there anything that would actually ‘heal the divide’?

The point I'm trying to make is that in all probability another referendum is going to be very close. If you look at the stats, 88% of Remainers say they aren't going to change their vote, 88% of Leavers say they aren't going to change their vote, 7% of Leavers say they're going to change their vote to Remain, 8% of Remainers say they're going to change to vote Leave.

If an other referendum gave a convincing endorsement to one or other side, regardless of things are too broken now for real harmony, then the losing side has really no other option but to STFU and get on with life, whichever way it goes.

[silentbrown]

Changing tack briefly, what's the game plan meant to be with FTAs if we leave with no deal and immediately drop most import tariffs, as proposed?

Why would other countries need to sign an FTA with us when we're already letting them export to us largely tariff-free?

[Gribs]

FiF said:

The point I'm trying to make is that in all probability another referendum is going to be very close. If you look at the stats, 88% of Remainers say they aren't going to change their vote, 88% of Leavers say they aren't going to change their vote, 7% of Leavers say they're going to change their vote to Remain, 8% of Remainers say they're going to change to vote Leave.

That doesn't take into account that far more leave voters than remain voters have died since the previous vote and a majority of new voters support remain. The stats suggest that if no one changed their vote at all remain would win just due to deaths of leavers. I'd also expect turn out among the young to be far higher than before as campaigning will target them heavily and over the last couple of years they seem to have become generally more politically engaged.

If leave thought they had a reasonable chance of winning they'd be calling for another referendum to avoid May's st deal that is objectively worse than remaining without even the slight possibility of being advantageous in the future like no deal. The majority of people I know are remainers and a large proportion of them prefer no deal over May's.

[Vanden Saab]

silentbrown said:

Changing tack briefly, what's the game plan meant to be with FTAs if we leave with no deal and immediately drop most import tariffs, as proposed?

Why would other countries need to sign an FTA with us when we're already letting them export to us largely tariff-free?

Firstly FTAs are as much about non tarrif barriers and secondly while we may reduce most tarrifs to zero we, without a FTA, have the option to increase them to specifically target a country that is taking the micky. Once you have some FTAs in place other countries will not want to take the risk of being excluded.

[Elysium]

FiF said:

Elysium said:

FiF said:

Problem is another referendum isn't going to heal the divide.






More analysis here, behind paywall https://digitaledition.telegraph.co.uk/editions/ed...

In the short term it will break the deadlock and confirm what the majority want.

That won’t make the minority position any easier, but over time we will at least be able to get on with other things.

Parliament deciding to delay for no clear reason, reluctantly leaving with no-deal or holding their nose to take a bad deal, without checking with us to see what we want, will make things worse.

Is there anything that would actually ‘heal the divide’?

The point I'm trying to make is that in all probability another referendum is going to be very close. If you look at the stats, 88% of Remainers say they aren't going to change their vote, 88% of Leavers say they aren't going to change their vote, 7% of Leavers say they're going to change their vote to Remain, 8% of Remainers say they're going to change to vote Leave.

If an other referendum gave a convincing endorsement to one or other side, regardless of things are too broken now for real harmony, then the losing side has really no other option but to STFU and get on with life, whichever way it goes.

I understand, but you are still talking about 'sides'.

In this thread, just today, I have read posts from leave voters who think we should take the deal, leave voters who want no-deal and remain voters who are similarly split.

Virtually no-one seems to want this deal, everyone who is saying we should take it has simply resigned themselves to 'defeat'. Conversely, I have read posts by leave supporters in this forum threatening civil disobedience if we leave with the deal!

At this point, it is not just about leave or remain, it is about how we leave, how long we drag this out for and if the price of leaving, which is not the Brexit most people seem to have wanted, is actually worth paying.

I am personally horrified that we have pinned ourselves into a corner, where we feel obliged to agree a bad brexit deal, via a withdrawal agreement no-one likes, because we don't want to 'upset' people by asking them if it is OK.

A second referendum will almost certainly be close, given how divided we are. But at least we would find out what the majority want - deal, no-deal or remain - no matter how small that majority might be.

Anything else is just guessing. Which is why Parliament have opted to delay.

[Blue62]

Dr Jekyll said:

Ah yes, the old 'we must stay in their club because they are vindictive sods who will be nasty to us' argument.

I'm not so sure about that Doc, they are protecting their interests, surely you wouldn't expect them to roll over. We are the ones who voted to leave, so unless we are prepared to walk I think the EU are well within their rights to make life difficult.

[Dr Jekyll]

silentbrown said:

Changing tack briefly, what's the game plan meant to be with FTAs if we leave with no deal and immediately drop most import tariffs, as proposed?

Why would other countries need to sign an FTA with us when we're already letting them export to us largely tariff-free?

For one thing there would still be import tariffs on certain things, and of course we could always introduce more tariffs in the future if we wanted. Secondly trade deals can include non tariff measures in return for dropping tariffs, Singapore has very few tariffs but has just signed an FTA with the EU.

In any case we get much of the benefit of free trade just by no longer charging ourselves import tariffs, so FTAs become less important.

[anonymous-user]

FiF said:

The point I'm trying to make is that in all probability another referendum is going to be very close. If you look at the stats, 88% of Remainers say they aren't going to change their vote, 88% of Leavers say they aren't going to change their vote, 7% of Leavers say they're going to change their vote to Remain, 8% of Remainers say they're going to change to vote Leave.

If an other referendum gave a convincing endorsement to one or other side, regardless of things are too broken now for real harmony, then the losing side has really no other option but to STFU and get on with life, whichever way it goes.

There is one significant fact, that might make a difference, and that is that i think the significant number of people who didn't vote in the original referendum are on average more likely to be Remainers than Leavers.

Most people thought, and the Polls suggested, that we would vote to stay, so i'm reasonably certain that a large enough number of Remainers didn't vote because they thought there was no need. However, if you were a leaver, then this was your only chance to vote to Leave, then you more likely did vote. Yes, a few leavers will have thought "there is no point voting because we won't get a majority" but they are likely i think to be out weighed by Leavers who did vote because they thought it was likely to be their only chance to do so?

I could be wrong, but that ^^ is at least a possibility, and may be more significant than any "changes" in opinion in the people who did actually vote.

It's also worth noting, that the older you are, the more likely you were to vote Leave, and nearly 500,000 people die of old age each year, so there are about 1.25 Million fewer of the older generation, of which ~65% voted to Leave, so that's another possibly significant swing, when added to the ~ 1M younger people now eligible to vote because they have turned 18 in the last 2.5 years.

[don'tbesilly]

psi310398 said:

crankedup said:

I agree that my comment regarding how constituencies voted had no bearing on a referendum result.My point that I was trying to make was simply that MPs have a constituency for which they represent.In my constituency the referendum result was around 55% leave/ 40 something remain.This is used by myself to see how my MP reacts to her constituents voting pattern. Others can and have reacted the same, how else are we supposed to ‘oversee’ our MPs performances.?

Interesting news just in.

Nick Boles, the Conservative MP Grantham and Stamford, has resigned his membership of his local constituency association, saying:

“I am not willing to do what would be necessary to restore a reasonable working relationship with a group of people whose values and views are so much at odds with my own” I will continue to take Tory whip “if it is offered to me on acceptable terms.”

So a Conservative MP who knows the game is up and that he won't be fighting the next election as a Conservative candidate. The first of many?

I wonder if Grieve would follow suit, Grieve was roundly shown up for the hypocrite he is on TW by both Neil and Portillo.

Has Soubry resigned from her local constituency in Broxtowe?
Soubry is now labelled as an Independent, as far as I'm aware she's still her local constituent Tory MP, no one voted for her as their Independent MP.

[Mrr T]

don'tbesilly said:

Mrr T said:

steve_k said:

June 2016 Prime Minister David Cameron:

“The British public would be voting if we leave would be to leave the EU and leave the single market. We’d then have to negotiate a trade deal from outside with the European Union... But if we leave the EU and the German finance minister was very clear, you’re either in or you’re out, leaving the single market, you’ve then got to negotiate a trade deal.”

Maybe you didn't understand or were just not listening to what the PM said.

But leavers said every thing Cameron said was a lie. So clearly this was a lie.

It wasn't just Cameron, the list would fill an A4 page

Or the side of a bus.

I agree dreadful campaigns on both sides and part of the reason we are where we are.

[Elysium]

Robertj21a said:

Tuna said:

May could do that tomorrow if she wanted to - no need for a nine month bun fight. Announce she doesn't think another meaningful vote will resolve things and state that No Deal planning is advanced enough to make that the best decision. It wouldn't make the minority position any easier, but over time we will at least be able to get on with other things.

I actually think a better politician could get away with that - it would be hard for Remain to argue it wasn't within the Government's remit, it would bring certainty, and after a short period of gnashing of teeth, most of the country would just get on with it. So long as we don't suffer actual Armageddon, the public would very quickly start thinking the hysteria was overblown. There would be more respect for someone making a clear decision than May's endless prevarication.

It is about the only bold decision that could be made though. Rescinding A50 is just not within the remit of the Government and would make a lot of people very angry - not just Leavers. A second referendum is the weakest way out (and a complete gamble as it would be unlikely to 'resolve' anything to the general public's satisfaction). A General Election would stuff the country up worst of all - we either end up with the same lot of morons back again and no further on, or we get the other lot of morons who don't actually have any meaningful plan other than wanting to have got to this point with a completely different deal (that also involves unicorns and cake).

Couldn't agree more. Well said.

.

Except she can't do that tomorrow for a number of reasons:

1. Leaving with no-deal underlines her failure to negotiate an acceptable withdrawal agreement. Remember she is still telling parliament that this is the right deal and the best way to deliver the Brexit mandate

2. If she moves to leave with no deal as Govt policy it will be defeated in the commons. MP's have voted, with a convincing majority, against a no-deal Brexit under any circumstances

3. There is no evidence of majority public support for no-deal. If any of the predictions about the damage it might cause came to pass it would destroy the Tory parties reputation as a party of economic prudence.

4. The Tory party is deeply divided over Brexit and forcing no-deal would rip it apart.

No deal was never going to be a deliberate choice.

[mike9009]

Max_Torque said:

e.

It's also worth noting, that the older you are, the more likely you were to vote Leave, and nearly 500,000 people die of old age each year, so there are about 1.25 Million fewer of the older generation, of which ~65% voted to Leave, so that's another possibly significant swing, when added to the ~ 1M younger people now eligible to vote because they have turned 18 in the last 2.5 years.

So, as a Remainer, we should drag this out by another couple of years before having another vote?? Or do people become more likely to vote Brexit with senility?

[don'tbesilly]

Elysium said:

FiF said:

Elysium said:

FiF said:

Problem is another referendum isn't going to heal the divide.






More analysis here, behind paywall https://digitaledition.telegraph.co.uk/editions/ed...

In the short term it will break the deadlock and confirm what the majority want.

That won’t make the minority position any easier, but over time we will at least be able to get on with other things.

Parliament deciding to delay for no clear reason, reluctantly leaving with no-deal or holding their nose to take a bad deal, without checking with us to see what we want, will make things worse.

Is there anything that would actually ‘heal the divide’?

The point I'm trying to make is that in all probability another referendum is going to be very close. If you look at the stats, 88% of Remainers say they aren't going to change their vote, 88% of Leavers say they aren't going to change their vote, 7% of Leavers say they're going to change their vote to Remain, 8% of Remainers say they're going to change to vote Leave.

If an other referendum gave a convincing endorsement to one or other side, regardless of things are too broken now for real harmony, then the losing side has really no other option but to STFU and get on with life, whichever way it goes.

I understand, but you are still talking about 'sides'.

In this thread, just today, I have read posts from leave voters who think we should take the deal, leave voters who want no-deal and remain voters who are similarly split.

Virtually no-one seems to want this deal, everyone who is saying we should take it has simply resigned themselves to 'defeat'. Conversely, I have read posts by leave supporters in this forum threatening civil disobedience if we leave with the deal!

At this point, it is not just about leave or remain, it is about how we leave, how long we drag this out for and if the price of leaving, which is not the Brexit most people seem to have wanted, is actually worth paying.

I am personally horrified that we have pinned ourselves into a corner, where we feel obliged to agree a bad brexit deal, via a withdrawal agreement no-one likes, because we don't want to 'upset' people by asking them if it is OK.

A second referendum will almost certainly be close, given how divided we are. But at least we would find out what the majority want - deal, no-deal or remain - no matter how small that majority might be.

Anything else is just guessing. Which is why Parliament have opted to delay.

Any second referendum is looking to be increasingly unlikely.
No elections for UK MEP's in May and we leave the EU on the 1st July deal or no deal.

[Elysium]

steve_k said:

Mrr T said:

steve_k said:

June 2016 Prime Minister David Cameron:

“The British public would be voting if we leave would be to leave the EU and leave the single market. We’d then have to negotiate a trade deal from outside with the European Union... But if we leave the EU and the German finance minister was very clear, you’re either in or you’re out, leaving the single market, you’ve then got to negotiate a trade deal.”

Maybe you didn't understand or were just not listening to what the PM said.

But leavers said every thing Cameron said was a lie. So clearly this was a lie.

Read the quote

Nowhere were people told that leaving without a deal was even an option.

I don't recall any campaigner, on either side, suggesting that we would not even be able to agree terms of withdrawal.

[Elysium]

don'tbesilly said:

Elysium said:

FiF said:

Elysium said:

FiF said:

Problem is another referendum isn't going to heal the divide.






More analysis here, behind paywall https://digitaledition.telegraph.co.uk/editions/ed...

In the short term it will break the deadlock and confirm what the majority want.

That won’t make the minority position any easier, but over time we will at least be able to get on with other things.

Parliament deciding to delay for no clear reason, reluctantly leaving with no-deal or holding their nose to take a bad deal, without checking with us to see what we want, will make things worse.

Is there anything that would actually ‘heal the divide’?

The point I'm trying to make is that in all probability another referendum is going to be very close. If you look at the stats, 88% of Remainers say they aren't going to change their vote, 88% of Leavers say they aren't going to change their vote, 7% of Leavers say they're going to change their vote to Remain, 8% of Remainers say they're going to change to vote Leave.

If an other referendum gave a convincing endorsement to one or other side, regardless of things are too broken now for real harmony, then the losing side has really no other option but to STFU and get on with life, whichever way it goes.

I understand, but you are still talking about 'sides'.

In this thread, just today, I have read posts from leave voters who think we should take the deal, leave voters who want no-deal and remain voters who are similarly split.

Virtually no-one seems to want this deal, everyone who is saying we should take it has simply resigned themselves to 'defeat'. Conversely, I have read posts by leave supporters in this forum threatening civil disobedience if we leave with the deal!

At this point, it is not just about leave or remain, it is about how we leave, how long we drag this out for and if the price of leaving, which is not the Brexit most people seem to have wanted, is actually worth paying.

I am personally horrified that we have pinned ourselves into a corner, where we feel obliged to agree a bad brexit deal, via a withdrawal agreement no-one likes, because we don't want to 'upset' people by asking them if it is OK.

A second referendum will almost certainly be close, given how divided we are. But at least we would find out what the majority want - deal, no-deal or remain - no matter how small that majority might be.

Anything else is just guessing. Which is why Parliament have opted to delay.

Any second referendum is looking to be increasingly unlikely.
No elections for UK MEP's in May and we leave the EU on the 1st July deal or no deal.

There is a vote next week on the deal. The Govt motion is to delay till Jun if approved or much later if it is rejected to allow us to fight EU elections

[GT119]

FiF said:

Problem is another referendum isn't going to heal the divide.






More analysis here, behind paywall https://digitaledition.telegraph.co.uk/editions/ed...

I thought polls were meaningless. If we are now accepting them as useful then how about this one.

https://d25d2506sfb94s.cloudfront.net/cumulus_uplo...

The outcomes that have the most support are either BRINO (staying in CU/SM) or remain.

Not much support for May’s deal or no deal.