Cont: Brexit: Now What? 9 Below Zero

[SezMe]

Informative post - thanks.

<snip>
A second referendum wouldn't be a perfect solution, of course, but it would definitely be superior. This is because the last few years have seen the Leavers push the narrative of "the will of the people" over and over and over again. It's practically a religious mantra at this point. So that rather takes the wind out of the sails of any protests against the result of a second referendum. This is doubly true if said referendum is legally binding - which also helps to protect against the corruption that occurred during the campaigning for the first one.

I read that as saying not only would the result bind the winner but that promises made by the side that wins have to be incorporated in the final result. It seems otherwise that again Leavers could promise gold streets to win then deliver dirt paths. Is that what you meant?

Even people like Farage might be able to use it as enough of a jumping-off point to abandon UK politics and go and become a talk show host in the US.

Thanks, but no thanks.

 

[The Don]

It's interesting that the pundits who were suggesting that the DUP would sign up to Boris Johnson's deal (which was expected to put the customs border in the Irish Sea) safe in the knowledge that the PM had a cunning plan not to implement it and instead crash out with no deal on 31 October had misread the signs.

No doubt Brexiteers will lay the blame for the deal not passing at the feet at Remoaners but it seems that the DUP reject the deal as it stands.

oris Johnson has suffered a blow to his proposed Brexit deal as the Democratic Unionist Party said it cannot support plans "as things stand".

The support of the DUP is seen as crucial if the prime minister is to win Parliament's approval for the deal in time for his 31 October deadline.

The DUP said it would continue to work with the government to try to get a "sensible" deal.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-50077760

Of course this could just be a shakedown by the DUP in an attempt to extract more money from the government because it's difficult to see what kind of alternative deal could be acceptable to the DUP and EU. Perhaps the wording is just there to try and deflect blame.

 

[Samson]

I see the latest Ladbrokes odds here

Article 50 Extended And UK Remains In EU After Oct 31
1/5
UK to leave EU with Deal
5/1
UK to leave EU with No Deal
7/1
UK to Revoke Article 50
50/1

What will happen first?
UK general election
4/6
UK to leave EU
7/4
Another UK EU referendum
7/1

Brexit Specials
Another UK EU Referendum before end 2020
6/4
UK to vote to REMAIN in EU before end 2020
4/1
Another UK EU Referendum before end 2019
25/1

 

[Vixen]

It's interesting that the pundits who were suggesting that the DUP would sign up to Boris Johnson's deal (which was expected to put the customs border in the Irish Sea) safe in the knowledge that the PM had a cunning plan not to implement it and instead crash out with no deal on 31 October had misread the signs.

No doubt Brexiteers will lay the blame for the deal not passing at the feet at Remoaners but it seems that the DUP reject the deal as it stands.



https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-50077760

Of course this could just be a shakedown by the DUP in an attempt to extract more money from the government because it's difficult to see what kind of alternative deal could be acceptable to the DUP and EU. Perhaps the wording is just there to try and deflect blame.

It can't be done even with DUP consent. A Bill would need to be passed to change the legislation in this, effectively changing the legal style of NI viz a viz the UK. It b'ain't gonna happen.

 

[Squeegee Beckenheim]

I read that as saying not only would the result bind the winner but that promises made by the side that wins have to be incorporated in the final result. It seems otherwise that again Leavers could promise gold streets to win then deliver dirt paths. Is that what you meant?

Pretty much.

What I'm thinking of is there being three options (and using a STV format to ensure fairness¹): Remain, Leave with a deal, and Leave with No Deal. The deal would be worked out beforehand, legal in the UK, and agreed to by the EU. All three positions would be officially set out in writing², and accessible online for everybody to read.

The fact that it's legally binding would mean that parliament would have to enact whichever option was chosen by the public. So if "Leave with a deal" was chosen, then they would have to pass legislation that the UK would leave with the specific deal that was voted for. Any attempts to amend the deal would void the referendum.

I'm a little unsure how much power it would have to prevent exaggerations and truth-stretching during the campaigns before the election, though. Outright lying would risk the referendum result being voided, but I imagine that truth-stretching is more of a grey area.

¹Although I think we're all using STV incorrectly. There's another word for this kind of vote when it's applying to choosing just one outcome rather than PR, but I can't remember what it is.

²I'm unsure of the legalities of this, but you could even have three pieces of legislation ready and waiting to go, and parliament waves through whichever one wins the vote, although this perhaps allows for the possibility of the system being abused without the requisite time for that abuse to be challenged in court.

 

[Dave Rogers]

¹Although I think we're all using STV incorrectly. There's another word for this kind of vote when it's applying to choosing just one outcome rather than PR, but I can't remember what it is.

I think you mean Instant Run-off Voting, though in the 2011 UK referendum it was referred to as AV for Altenative Vote.

Dave

 

[Samson]

I must be missing something because this betting line

UK to vote to REMAIN in EU before end 2020
4/1

looks like a lay down misere

 

[erwinl]

According to here, there is a deal. (Dutch language, but easily translated in Google translate)

Now for both parties to ratify it.

 

[Pixel42]

I'm actually OK with this deal being approved by Parliament as long as it has to be put back to a confirmatory referendum before it's implemented. At least the people will know exactly what they're voting for, instead of voting for a pig in a poke like they did in 2016.

 

[a_unique_person]

Looks like Boris Johnson is attempting to breach section 55 of the Taxation (Cross-border Trade) Act 2018







The GRUANIAD reports Jolyon Maughm QC is lodging a writ with the Scottish Courts ruling the 'deal' unlawful. It looks like, from the wording, to indeed be so, if Northern Ireland is in the Customs Union whilst the rest is out.





Maybe that is what is the hold up regarding VAT according to the EU.



Never trust last minute offers anyway. 'Hurry! Offer Ends Today!'





No, let us not be rushed.

What is the difference between the Backstop and this new proposal?

 

[Vixen]

Boris claims there is no backstop and NI is not in the Customs Union as won't be the rest o the UK.

Hmm. Sounds suspect to me that you can just draw up a deal overnight.

 

[a_unique_person]

Careful now, these could be interpreted as death threats and used to demonstratie that Remainers are every bit as bad as swivel-eyed Brexiteers who say all Remainer MP's are traitors who should hang from the nearest lamp post.



Dave

Not at all. No one really thinks I believe that Boris is honorable.

 

[a_unique_person]

Boris has reached a deal with the EU. So that's over and done with at least.


No, wait, it has to be voted on first.

 

[Vixen]

I bet Boris now wishes he hadn't sacked 21 Tory MP's. Nigel Dodds will be looking more hang dog than normal and Arlene Foster more grumpy than her doppelganger, Paul Merson.

Not to mention the pole-dancing American in the background claiming British grants by apparently faking a virtual British address to get her hands on the dosh, whilst romping with married man BoJo, if her friend's claims are true about this.

In a letter to the president of the European council, Donald Tusk, Juncker said it was time for the British House of Commons to do its part to bring the first phase of the negotiations to an end.

He wrote: “I believe it is high time to complete the withdrawal process and move on, as swiftly as possible, to the negotiation on the European Union’s future partnership with the United Kingdom.”

With the DUP refusing to give its backing, there remains little hope that the deal will pass through the British parliament unless Johnson is able to convince both a significant number of Labour MPs and a chunk of the 21 MPs whose whip as Conservatives was removed last month.

- Guradian

Saturday's HoC session will be a riotous affair I am sure. All we need is an XR presence to make the farce complete.

ETA and the pompous windbag Ian Blackford sounding off.

 

[The Great Zaganza]

so what's the deal?
For someone like me way too lazy to read more than 2 sentences?

 

[GlennB]

I must be missing something because this betting line

UK to vote to REMAIN in EU before end 2020
4/1

looks like a lay down misere

What do you mean? A bid of misère in solo whist contracts to win no tricks at all. What's the connection with the odds quoted?

If you're suggesting that that 4-1 is a certain loser then you'd need to get the bookie to quote the reverse odds, which won't (quite) be 1-4.

 

[Vixen]

Sounds like Boris has already lied. Barnier says NI will be in the EU VAT zone.

On VAT, Barnier says an agreement was reached overnight. There was an issue with the need for consistency on VAT rates. A mechanism to ensure this was agreed. The EU system would apply in Northern Ireland.

So remains in the Customs Union.

It differs from the 'backstop' in that the NI assembly gets to vote on it every four years:

At the end of the transition period there would be a four-year period for the new arrangements to be in force. At the end of that the members of the Northern Ireland assembly would vote, on the basis of a simple majority, for the arrangement to continue for another four years. If there were a cross-community vote in favour, it would continue for eight years. If there were a vote to end the arrangements, there would be a two-year cooling off period.

He says this new approach has nothing to do with the old backstop. It sets up a system in Northern Ireland that is sustainable. It is linked to regular, democratic verification. There is ownership of this in Northern Ireland. We now must place our trust in the system, he says.

I suppose it avoids breaching the GFA..?

 

[Vixen]

so what's the deal?
For someone like me way too lazy to read more than 2 sentences?

Here you go then:

Q: The UK authorities will be able to apply their own tariffs, as long as there is no risk of goods entering the single market. How will that be established?

Barnier says there is a possibility that goods arriving from GB, or from a third country via GB, might not stay in the customs territory of NI. That risk exists. That is why both sides have come up with a mechanism to assess this risk. The assessment will be based on a number of criteria, overseen by a joint committee. What is the destination of the goods? Are they consumer goods or industrial goods? What is the value of the goods? What is the risk of an infringement?

Q: What was key turning point in the last week?

Barnier says the taoiseach had a special responsibility. The Irish government is a co-guarantor of the Good Friday agreement. He met Boris Johnson in Liverpool. And after that meeting the UK and the EU were able to make headway. They agreed there would be no customs checks in Ireland or Northern Ireland.

He says this new solution must be sustainable.

Now discuss.

 

[Dave Rogers]

What is the difference between the Backstop and this new proposal?

The new one's called Sellafield?

Dave

 

[Lothian]

The deal has already been dismissed

"You can see that we are witnessing the birth of a new country called UK(NI) or Ukni. Ukni is no longer exclusively ruled by London or Stormont. Ukni is in large parts to be ruled by Brussels." said Mr Boris Johnston........ errr. sorry, my bad, that is what he said when the EU proposed this solution last time and when May said "No Uk prime minister could ever agree" to such a deal.