Cont: Brexit: Now What? 7th heaven...

[catsmate]

Therein lies the paradox. Corbyn is anti-capitalist. Most labour voters are not.

ETA to expand on this most socialists see the EU as a union of capitalists determined to (a) bring down the price of labour and raw materials (b) thereby maximise profits for the capitalist employers and corporations.

Corbyn is anti-EU as he sees British workers' wages undermined by the appearance of cheap labour from East Europe.

Hence his insistence in drawing up protection for workers rights after Brexit, which Theresa May had somehow omitted to include.

Again, no.

 

[Andy_Ross]

we had 44 Brexit supporting MEPs last week and only 9 Remain. We now have 32 Brexit and 28 Remain. Stop spreading their victory propaganda.
They lost 12 Seats. We gained 21.

 

[Ian Osborne]

we had 44 Brexit supporting MEPs last week and only 9 Remain. We now have 32 Brexit and 28 Remain. Stop spreading their victory propaganda. They lost 12 Seats. We gained 21.

That's interesting. Do you have a breakdown?

 

[McHrozni]

The problem there is the assumption that people currently apparently backing a Deal/Soft Brexit would still choose Leave in another in/out referendum, even assuming they did that last time around. The whole point about them wanting a deal is that they recognise - just as much as Remainers - that a No Deal Brexit will be detrimental to the country. Given a choice between No Deal and Remain, many will chose the latter.

This is not something that should decided in a debate full of speculation. If the will of the electorate is unclear on a major constitutional question such as this one the proper way is to run a referendum.

Don't get me wrong, I love to speculate myself. But this is not a question that should be decided based on speculation.

McHrozni

 

[McHrozni]

There are various splits, this one has 40.4% remain, 34.9% hard brexit and then 23.2% Con/Lab.

https://www.theguardian.com/politic...xit-what-uk-european-election-results-tell-us

The soft brexit vote is primarily within the 23.2% Con/Lab vote. There will also be some who are either leave or remain, but who chose to vote for their preferred party.

I think there may be enough leavers who voted Con/Lab to make a second referendum too close to call. You need to add the hard and soft brexit vote to see what the leave vote is.

Pretty much all the analysis says the same: the country is split down the middle, just over 40% want Brexit, come hell or high water while another 40% or so want to remain in the EU, the rest think there are other questions too that merit attention.

Any serious country would decide against a major constitutional change that has the support of just barely half the electorate that bothers to consider the question. Sadly Britain has been a joke for quite a while now.

The only sensible ways out that I see are:

1. Norway+ style Brexit; if Farage et.al. want to leave Single market and Customs union they'll need to campaign for it and win a referendum to leave those - fairly, with no overspending and against a competent campaign calling out their lies.
2. Another referendum, legally binding and with a requirement that losers accept the result and bury the question for at least 20 years.

Neither is likely to happen any time soon, but any other solution will be temporary in nature. Heck, option 1 may not be stable either and I really don't see mr.Democracy-only-works-when-losers-accept-the-result accepting a result he dislikes. He said so before the referendum, but changed the tune since.

There is a nuclear option - No deal Brexit, following the catastrophic crisis for 6-12 months a new deal with EU is signed. It is similar to Norway+, but is more expensive for UK and came at a price of wiping out British manufaturing and services exports. That would be stable, probably, but the price may not be worth paying.

McHrozni

 

[The Don]

Pretty much all the analysis says the same: the country is split down the middle, just over 40% want Brexit, come hell or high water while another 40% or so want to remain in the EU, the rest think there are other questions too that merit attention.

Any serious country would decide against a major constitutional change that has the support of just barely half the electorate that bothers to consider the question. Sadly Britain has been a joke for quite a while now.

The only sensible ways out that I see are:

1. Norway+ style Brexit; if Farage et.al. want to leave Single market and Customs union they'll need to campaign for it and win a referendum to leave those - fairly, with no overspending and against a competent campaign calling out their lies.
2. Another referendum, legally binding and with a requirement that losers accept the result and bury the question for at least 20 years.

Neither is likely to happen any time soon, but any other solution will be temporary in nature. Heck, option 1 may not be stable either and I really don't see mr.Democracy-only-works-when-losers-accept-the-result accepting a result he dislikes. He said so before the referendum, but changed the tune since.

There is a nuclear option - No deal Brexit, following the catastrophic crisis for 6-12 months a new deal with EU is signed. It is similar to Norway+, but is more expensive for UK and came at a price of wiping out British manufaturing and services exports. That would be stable, probably, but the price may not be worth paying.

McHrozni

Sadly, what I think will happen is that, because the Conservatives will still be in charge and they will have elected a no-deal supporting leader, the UK will crash out of the EU with no-deal. Furthermore, the so called "divorce deal" will be repudiated and the Conservatives will claim a £40bn victory for Brexit.

Unfortunately this will mean that post-Brexit negotiations with the EU will start with a great deal of ill-feeling on both sides. The UK will continue to pursue a "unicorns and rainbows" trade deal in which we want all the benefits of EU membership but none of the responsibilities. The EU on the other hand will continue to insist that without the four freedoms being recognised, EEA membership is impossible and that if the UK insists on striking separate trade deals with EU partners, Customs Union membership is also off the cards. The negotiations start to drag on for years.

Meanwhile, the UK economy has taken a major hit and the £40bn "Brexit bonus" is long spent. The UK is desperate for a trade deal and goes cap in hand to the US. A trade deal is relatively quickly agreed and is hailed a triumph and a boon for the UK economy. It quickly becomes clear that this is not the case, and although it makes it much easier for US companies to export to the UK, and for US companies to sell into the NHS, exporting to the US if anything becomes more difficult.

 

[The Don]

That's interesting. Do you have a breakdown?

Before the 2019 elections:

Pro-Brexit:

Party | Seats
UKIP|24
Labour|20
Conservative|19
DUP|1
Total|64

Pro-Remain:

Party | Seats
Green|3
SNP|2
LibDem|1
Plaid Cymru|1
Sinn Fein|1
UUP|1
Total|9

After...


Pro-Brexit:

Party | Seats
Brexit|29
Labour|10
Conservative|4
DUP|1
Total|44 (-20)

Pro-Remain:

Party | Seats
Green|7
SNP|3
LibDem|16
Plaid Cymru|1
Sinn Fein|1
Alliance Party|1
Total|29 (+20)

Depends on how you view the Labour Party...

 

[McHrozni]

Sadly, what I think will happen is that, because the Conservatives will still be in charge and they will have elected a no-deal supporting leader, the UK will crash out of the EU with no-deal. Furthermore, the so called "divorce deal" will be repudiated and the Conservatives will claim a £40bn victory for Brexit.

Unfortunately this will mean that post-Brexit negotiations with the EU will start with a great deal of ill-feeling on both sides. The UK will continue to pursue a "unicorns and rainbows" trade deal in which we want all the benefits of EU membership but none of the responsibilities. The EU on the other hand will continue to insist that without the four freedoms being recognised, EEA membership is impossible and that if the UK insists on striking separate trade deals with EU partners, Customs Union membership is also off the cards. The negotiations start to drag on for years.

Meanwhile, the UK economy has taken a major hit and the £40bn "Brexit bonus" is long spent. The UK is desperate for a trade deal and goes cap in hand to the US. A trade deal is relatively quickly agreed and is hailed a triumph and a boon for the UK economy. It quickly becomes clear that this is not the case, and although it makes it much easier for US companies to export to the UK, and for US companies to sell into the NHS, exporting to the US if anything becomes more difficult.

Possible, but given the circumstance ... not so much. It will be September before any of this becomes relevant, by that time the election season in USA will be running hot. Trump lacks skilled people pretty much by default and what remains at the bottom of the barrell will be organizing the campaign. Brexit UK has the same issue, but they'll be dealing with the no deal Brexit fallout too.

This fallout is not mere "queues at the border", but goes by the names of "divestment", "fall of orders" and "relocating business to mainland Europe". A trade deal with USA solves exactly zero of those. Reorientating towards the US is theoretically possible, but in practice it would take a generation at least and make UK far poorer. Plus Pelosi already stated the Congress will demand a solution to the Irish question before ratifying anything, so you need a deal with EU first anyway.

McHrozni

 

[The Don]

Possible, but given the circumstance ... not so much. It will be September before any of this becomes relevant, by that time the election season in USA will be running hot. Trump lacks skilled people pretty much by default and what remains at the bottom of the barrell will be organizing the campaign. Brexit UK has the same issue, but they'll be dealing with the no deal Brexit fallout too.

This fallout is not mere "queues at the border", but goes by the names of "divestment", "fall of orders" and "relocating business to mainland Europe". A trade deal with USA solves exactly zero of those. Reorientating towards the US is theoretically possible, but in practice it would take a generation at least and make UK far poorer. Plus Pelosi already stated the Congress will demand a solution to the Irish question before ratifying anything, so you need a deal with EU first anyway.

McHrozni

Regarding timing, I'm thinking 2022 or afterwards for the panic deal with the US.

As you point out, 2019 is pretty much used up.

IMO 2020 will be spent putting out major economic fires, there'll be no capacity for trade negotiations.

2021/2022 will be spent trying to strike some kind of deal with the EU - the biggest problem being that the UK doesn't know what it wants but then again it lacks the skilled negotiators to go about getting it. There may be talks in parallel with the US but the firesale won't come about until it becomes clear that the EU are not going to roll over.

edited to add....

You're right that a deal with the US will do little or nothing to improve the UK's position. The EU will continue to be the UK's largest trading partner, regardless of the terms, just because of physical proximity. Of course the Breixiteers don't care about any of this because the post-Brexit economic crisis will be a feature, not a bug and/or they really are deluded enough to think that the UK will not only emerge unscathed from a no-deal Brexit, it will actually be in better economic shape.

 

[Archie Gemmill Goal]

Sadly, what I think will happen is that, because the Conservatives will still be in charge and they will have elected a no-deal supporting leader, the UK will crash out of the EU with no-deal. Furthermore, the so called "divorce deal" will be repudiated and the Conservatives will claim a £40bn victory for Brexit.

Unfortunately this will mean that post-Brexit negotiations with the EU will start with a great deal of ill-feeling on both sides. The UK will continue to pursue a "unicorns and rainbows" trade deal in which we want all the benefits of EU membership but none of the responsibilities. The EU on the other hand will continue to insist that without the four freedoms being recognised, EEA membership is impossible and that if the UK insists on striking separate trade deals with EU partners, Customs Union membership is also off the cards. The negotiations start to drag on for years.

Meanwhile, the UK economy has taken a major hit and the £40bn "Brexit bonus" is long spent. The UK is desperate for a trade deal and goes cap in hand to the US. A trade deal is relatively quickly agreed and is hailed a triumph and a boon for the UK economy. It quickly becomes clear that this is not the case, and although it makes it much easier for US companies to export to the UK, and for US companies to sell into the NHS, exporting to the US if anything becomes more difficult.

That's probably the tip of the no-deal iceberg.

The Russians and Chinese will also be lurking looking to strip the carcass.

 

[The Don]

That's probably the tip of the no-deal iceberg.

The Russians and Chinese will also be lurking looking to strip the carcass.

Almost certainly, but they are very "foreign" whereas the US is just like us (and so many of the key Brexiteers are bankrolled by US interests).

 

[Nessie]

The lust for power in Farage is palpable and genuinely frightening.

 

[The Don]

The lust for power in Farage is palpable and genuinely frightening.

Is it power, or is it adulation and attention ? I honestly don't know.

Does he actually want to to lead the UK into Brexit, or does he want to be added to the history books as the inspiration for and architect of Brexit without actually having to get his hands dirty ?

 

[Wudang]

Or is it money?

 

[3point14]

Or is it money?

It's money, I would guess.

I suspect that some rich people who hang out with really, really rich people end up feeling really inadequate.

 

[Andy_Ross]

Farage is tipping his party as the Govt and himself as PM after the next General Election.

 

[Tolls]

The Russians and Chinese will also be lurking looking to strip the carcass.

And people wonder why the government was not ruling out using Huawei equipment...

 

[Archie Gemmill Goal]

And people wonder why the government was not ruling out using Huawei equipment...

An FTA with China which let's them flood the UK with cheap Chinese product would be a great boon (in the short term) for a government that implemented Brexit.

Look! We have Brexited and now you can get a huge flatscreen telly for 100 quid! Aren't we great!

 

[Mr Fied]

An FTA with China which let's them flood the UK with cheap Chinese product would be a great boon (in the short term) for a government that implemented Brexit.

Look! We have Brexited and now you can get a huge flatscreen telly for 100 quid! Aren't we great!

Just a shame that what's left of the British manufacturing industry is located in mainly leave areas, and these will bear the brunt of these cheap imports and the soon to be ex-workers won't be able to afford them.

 

[Francesca R]

Furthermore, the so called "divorce deal" will be repudiated and the Conservatives will claim a £40bn victory for Brexit.

I think the forty billion will emerge as a massive boost to no-deal compared to anything else.