Brexit: Now What? Part III

[The Don]

William Hague was IIRC pro-Remain but now sees that Brexit must happen:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-40785322

A few quotes:

Lord Hague also backed a "transitional" withdrawal from the EU saying it had "immense" attractions.

Of course it does, it leaves the UK with a functioning economy until the transitional arrangements expire

"What is more, the number of people who voted to do so was higher than the number of votes cast for any government in our history.

That is true, but it's also true that the number of people who voted Remain was higher than the number of votes cast for any government in our history and whilst they (we) were voting for a single thing the Leave voters were voting for a range of options from "******* OUT !!!! " through various forms of hard and soft Brexits, to options under which a workers' utopia would be established

He said there was the clear potential for Brexit to become the "greatest economic, diplomatic and constitutional muddle in the modern history of the UK, with unknowable consequences for the country, the government and the Brexit project itself".

Then why do it when support for it was so marginal ?

Lord Hague said: "He has evidently been trying to persuade his cabinet colleagues that we should be seeking to stay in the EU single market and customs union during a transition and 'implementation' phase lasting to 2022, followed by a free trade deal with our former partners after that.

"This is seen by longstanding advocates of leaving as a 'soft' position or a climbdown.

"But in reality it is a plan to rescue Brexit from an approaching disaster."

Because Bill, sadly that scenario is impossible

....not least because any trade deal is decades away

 

[Archie Gemmill Goal]

William Hague was IIRC pro-Remain but now sees that Brexit must happen:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-40785322

A few quotes:



Of course it does, it leaves the UK with a functioning economy until the transitional arrangements expire



That is true, but it's also true that the number of people who voted Remain was higher than the number of votes cast for any government in our history and whilst they (we) were voting for a single thing the Leave voters were voting for a range of options from "******* OUT !!!! " through various forms of hard and soft Brexits, to options under which a workers' utopia would be established



Then why do it when support for it was so marginal ?



Because Bill, sadly that scenario is impossible

....not least because any trade deal is decades away

Wow this just sums up the whole ridiculousness of the situation. People who think it's a bad idea but insisting we need to do it because reasons while no two people seem to agree on exactly what it is we need to do anyway

 

[3point14]

Better off out of it....

https://www.theguardian.com/busines...wth-gdp-uk-manufacturing-bank-of-england-live

 

[Vixen]

This is from a government publication. It is obviously intended to reflect and express support for the main motives for the pro-Brexit vote.

We have ruled out being a member of the single market, as the PM said in the Lancaster House speech. EU leaders have made clear their view that members of the single market must sign up to the ‘four freedoms’ that underpin it — including the free movement of people – and be subject to the jurisdiction of the European Court of Justice. We respect that position.​

That is what this is all about. Ending free movement.

I had to chuckle at the DAILY MAIL heavily hinting that the long delays at EU airports in the Schengen area for British holiday makers is some how Europe's revenge for the UK leaving the EU.

People from outside the Schengen free movement zone are being subjected to stricter vetting at passport control drawn up by Brussels after it emerged that terrorists may have used EU passports for atrocities in Paris that claimed 142 lives.

Airlines UK, an industry body representing UK-registered carriers, said it had warned the Department for Transport (DfT) about the problem in May, although they were told by ministers the issue had eased.

Tim Alderslade, the body's chief executive, said: 'Clearly the situation has changed markedly as we enter peak holiday season, and it is now up to the UK Government to work with industry to use whatever influence it can within the EU to persuade Schengen Member States to resource their border operations properly.'


Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...r-Brussels-passport-checks.html#ixzz4oaQSDLAf
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

It's amusing to me that airports have huge floor space for shops, restaurants, bars and coffee shops and a minuscule one for passport control.

At Helsinki, one is expected to walk circa half a mile to get to a connecting flight, past avenues and avenues of perfume, bag, Hermes scarves and other high end retailers.

As it is now popular with people flying on to the Far East the queues at the passport gates are getting ridiculous.

So, no, DAILY MAIL it is not particularly unusual to have passport control logjams.

 

[The Don]

So, no, DAILY MAIL it is not particularly unusual to have passport control logjams.

The Daily Fail misrepresents facts to make a dig at the EU ?

I'm shocked I tell you, shocked

 

[quadraginta]

The USA I think is quite unusual in anyone being born in the barn is classed as a cow.

More like they are classed as having been born in the barn.

And they get barn privileges because of that.

 

[Craig B]

I had to chuckle at the DAILY MAIL heavily hinting that the long delays at EU airports in the Schengen area for British holiday makers is some how Europe's revenge for the UK leaving the EU.

That's an odd response to my post which didn't refer to the Daily Mail, and had nothing to do with queues at passport control in Finland or anywhere else. My post was about HM Government's "Plan for Britain" for which I provided a link.

 

[Francesca R]

Anyone think there is a decent chance brexit never happens? I am cautiously optimistic about that.

 

[Francesca R]

Liam Fox says it's vitally important to keep foreigners out - even if we end up destroying the economy in the process

I would substitute virtually impossible for "vitally important" as countries like France and Germany discovered in the 1970s.

But trying to do so does indeed crater the economy on past precedent.

 

[3point14]

Anyone think there is a decent chance brexit never happens? I am cautiously optimistic about that.

well, it's been attempted by a bunch of incompetent Dunning-Krugers who really seem to have absolutely no idea what they're doing or, rather worryingly, what the EU actually is.

Either it will never happen or it will happen in such a way as to be an utter disaster. I think the opportunistic idiots running the show now would prefer the latter.

We all still need to remember to blame Arron Banks. It's vitally important to remember that when it's all gone tits up. He'll have probably moved to Russia by then.

 

[The Don]

Anyone think there is a decent chance brexit never happens? I am cautiously optimistic about that.

Sadly no

Both of the major parties have Brexit at the heart of their manifestos. It seems that Brexit is as close to a certainty as you get in politics - regardless of the damage it will undoubtedly (IMO) cause.

As the costs of Brexit become more apparent and the splits between the Leave enthusiasts become more pronounced I can envisage a time where public support for Brexit begins to fall. When it becomes apparent that imported goods will become more expensive, going on holiday to the EU is a pain, we can no longer bring back a boot-full of booze from Calais and so on, those people who voted for Brexit to shake things up a bit may reconsider their choices. When it becomes clear that Brexit isn't about levelling the playing field for developing nations on trade and the movement of people but rather ensuring that protectionism is maintained to guard our fragile economy some of the left-wing Brexiteers may start to think again. When it becomes apparent that there won't be mass deportations of brown people and Eastern Europeans then the EDL wing of Brexit may lose their enthusiasm for the project.

Under those circumstances I can see an economically and socially damaging policy pushed through against the wishes of the majority of people, simply because that's what the major parties promised to to

 

[McHrozni]

Sadly no

Both of the major parties have Brexit at the heart of their manifestos. It seems that Brexit is as close to a certainty as you get in politics - regardless of the damage it will undoubtedly (IMO) cause.

You need to define Brexit first. Given how negotiations are going I find it plausible UK will end up in a Norway-style model for the time being. It's the best case scenario for EU and least worst option for UK, after all. I know they all said it's not going to happen, but given that the magnitude of the task at hand grows larger every single day and they haven't even started to fix it, a transitory deal becoming semi-permanent seems at least plausible.

Do you call that Brexit? Technically it is, but it doesn't solve any outstanding issues.

McHrozni

 

[The Don]

You need to define Brexit first. Given how negotiations are going I find it plausible UK will end up in a Norway-style model for the time being.

Well yes, and no.

Whilst I think that a Norway-Style model would be the least worst option if we insist on pressing ahead with the madness which is Brexit, the government have specifically (and unanimously) ruled out the free movement of EU citizens post-Brexit even if transitional arrangements are put in place. This would rule out a Norway-style model.

Furthermore, senior Conservatives are briefing against each other so whilst Chancellor of the Exchequer and Breamainer Phil Hammond is talking about transitional arrangements, others are saying that there can and will be no transitional period.

It's the best case scenario for EU and least worst option for UK, after all. I know they all said it's not going to happen, but given that the magnitude of the task at hand grows larger every single day and they haven't even started to fix it, a transitory deal becoming semi-permanent seems at least plausible.

Do you call that Brexit? Technically it is, but it doesn't solve any outstanding issues.

McHrozni

It doesn't address the movement of people. Despite a lot of Brexit enthusiasts in the media and on this board saying that it wasn't just about immigration, it turns out - unsurprisingly enough it turns out that it's all about immigration.

The government (and, IMO to their shame, Labour ) have put keeping brown people and funny-sounding foreigners out of the UK front and centre of their policies. Without the free movement of people there will be no transitional arrangements and we end up with a diamond-hard Brexit instead.

 

[McHrozni]

Well yes, and no.

Whilst I think that a Norway-Style model would be the least worst option if we insist on pressing ahead with the madness which is Brexit, the government have specifically (and unanimously) ruled out the free movement of EU citizens post-Brexit even if transitional arrangements are put in place. This would rule out a Norway-style model.

Furthermore, senior Conservatives are briefing against each other so whilst Chancellor of the Exchequer and Breamainer Phil Hammond is talking about transitional arrangements, others are saying that there can and will be no transitional period.

I'm sure something could be arranged. Either the government concedes free movement "for the time being" (i.e. until further notice) or else EU accepts migrant quotas at about the level of where immigration to UK was anyway in exchange for other meaningful concessions and we're set.

It doesn't address the movement of people. Despite a lot of Brexit enthusiasts in the media and on this board saying that it wasn't just about immigration, it turns out - unsurprisingly enough it turns out that it's all about immigration.

The government (and, IMO to their shame, Labour ) have put keeping brown people and funny-sounding foreigners out of the UK front and centre of their policies. Without the free movement of people there will be no transitional arrangements and we end up with a diamond-hard Brexit instead.

Next spring the government will finally have a study about how much immigration should be controlled. We'll be able to say more then.

McHrozni

 

[The Don]

I'm sure something could be arranged. Either the government concedes free movement "for the time being" (i.e. until further notice) or else EU accepts migrant quotas at about the level of where immigration to UK was anyway in exchange for other meaningful concessions and we're set.

That would be quite a circle-squaring exercise. If the EU were to deal that would give the UK everything Cameron was looking for, membership of the EEA whilst having immigration controls - in effect rewarding the UK for Brexit - IMO something the EU cannot afford to let happen.

OTOH the government and Labour opposition have said that there must be immigration controls the day after Brexit so unless they are going to fold (and I suppose we could be in the ridiculous position that the government could swallow hard and do a U-Turn and we'd end up in the position where a Labour opposition is pressing a Conservative government hard for additional controls on immigration) then that isn't going to happen either.

Not saying that it cannot happen but I can't see a politically achievable way that it can.

Next spring the government will finally have a study about how much immigration should be controlled. We'll be able to say more then.

McHrozni

IMO the results of that report will be like a political Rorschach Test, you'll be able to draw whatever conclusions you want from it. AFAIK the report isn't going to say how much immigration should be controlled but instead will comment on the impact on immigration.

 

[Francesca R]

I don't see much of a political consensus in the government never mind across parties. Theresa May did the best thing she could have done (from the perspective of increasing the chances of derailing brexit) by calling the June election and stuffing it up. The optimistic way forward is for a few more months of political shambles followed by the government collapsing. Best hope after that is Labour or Lab-Lib offering a u turn manifesto.

I keep hearing that another referendum would produce at least the same vote to leave though. But I can't shake the conclusion that May's attempt in 2017 to do what she thought was "getting ahead of the curve" and hardening the brexit stance turned out to be a blunder indicating that popular opinion has soured to it

 

[McHrozni]

That would be quite a circle-squaring exercise. If the EU were to deal that would give the UK everything Cameron was looking for, membership of the EEA whilst having immigration controls - in effect rewarding the UK for Brexit - IMO something the EU cannot afford to let happen.

OTOH the government and Labour opposition have said that there must be immigration controls the day after Brexit so unless they are going to fold (and I suppose we could be in the ridiculous position that the government could swallow hard and do a U-Turn and we'd end up in the position where a Labour opposition is pressing a Conservative government hard for additional controls on immigration) then that isn't going to happen either.

Not saying that it cannot happen but I can't see a politically achievable way that it can.

Not yet anyway. UK-USA trade deal is on dry ice and the stream of bad economic news is ongoing. In time Whitehall may well recognize it has to make an U-turn, perhaps by calling it a "temporary agreement", but with the full knowledge it will be a decade or two before UK can replace the EU infrastructure.

EU could also compromise on free movement to avert disaster if UK offered substantial other concessions in order to justify the exception. It would have to seem a worse deal than accepting free movement, that is clear.

IMO the results of that report will be like a political Rorschach Test, you'll be able to draw whatever conclusions you want from it. AFAIK the report isn't going to say how much immigration should be controlled but instead will comment on the impact on immigration.

We'll see when it comes out and, more importantly, how the government responds to it. If it could be used as a justification for U-turn just as easily as it could be used to press on for a diamond-hard Brexit, the response of the government will tell us everything we need to know.

McHrozni

 

[Guybrush Threepwood]

I can see the UK coming to the realisation that Brexit wasn't a good idea, but I thought the decision on whether it goes ahead was now not solely a British one, the EU would have to agree to a withdrawal of Article 50, and I imagine they would want their pound of flesh for that, join the Euro and Schengen, no opt outs or rebates etc. That would be a hard sell to the UK public without a significantly longer period of economic pain I would have thought.

 

[Amazer]

I can see the UK coming to the realisation that Brexit wasn't a good idea, but I thought the decision on whether it goes ahead was now not solely a British one, the EU would have to agree to a withdrawal of Article 50, and I imagine they would want their pound of flesh for that, join the Euro and Schengen, no opt outs or rebates etc. That would be a hard sell to the UK public without a significantly longer period of economic pain I would have thought.

You put this a lot more clearly than I am capable of at the moment. But I agree with your assessment.

 

[Vixen]

So now an 'unnamed tory minister' wants to bring in 'British Only' passport lanes, in revenge for the supposed long queues facing British holidaymakers, due to more security in the Schengen area.

Is this really the quality of the people we elect to lead us? Childish gungho tantrum-throwing?

Minister calls for UK-only passport lanes at British airports to retaliate for queues 'Europe is forcing on us as a warning for what's in store after Brexit'
British holidaymaker have endured horrific waits at European passport checks
Queues are due to tighter EU regulations on entering and leave 'Schengen' area
A minister has said the UK to bring in 'British-only' lanes in response to chaos


Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...ort-lanes-British-airports.html#ixzz4omocSyht
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

I for one will welcome a British only queue at Heathrow, instead of having to queue up with the whole of Europe.

Going out, I retain my EU-citizenship anyway.