Westministenders: Brexit Britain = Gridlock Britain ?

[BigChocFrenzy]

We keep getting told the Uk can get a deal like Canada, Turkey or other non-EU countries have, without FOM.
Those deals do not provide the same privileges as EU members:
They have quotas, restrictions and must obey EU regulations

e.g. After CETA, Ron Davidson, head of international trade for the Canadian Meat Council stated:
"We do not have what we would call commercially viable access to the European market".

The deal with Turkey abolished tariffs, but did not give free acess. This is what that means:

www.ft.com/content/b4458652-f42d-11e6-8758-6876151821a6

"On a recent Saturday at the Kapikule border crossing, about 30 minutes drive from the Turkish city of Edirne, a line of trucks 4km long stretched along the highway, inching along glacially towards the Bulgarian checkpoints.
"Today is a good day", said Ibrahim Kurtukcu, a 42-year trucker who had been waiting 14 hours.
"Last week the line was 7km long".
The record is 17km. It can take up to 30 hours to get through to the other side."

Of course, UK ports (and French ports) do not have the capacity, facilities, storage space or trained staff to handle customs processing of the vast amount of British exports & imports.

Building this additional capacity - where ? - would take several years and there are no signs that even the planning stage has started.

Could May just let N I stay in the EU while still being part of the UK? I know there are places which are not in the EU, like the Channel Islands, but they aren't in the UK. Greenland, although no longer in the EEC is still part of the Kingdom of Denmark. But could it work the other way? One country/territory remained in?

'Cash for ash' was always overlapped by several other elements.

The first is Arlene Foster's traditional unionist intransigence and tendency to score petty points (see derisive Irish language comments www.bbc.com/news/uk-northern-ireland-38881559).

The second overlapping element is now Brexit, because the DUP nailed its colours to the Brexit mast and everyone else in NI is determined that tactical voting to stymie Brexit as much as possible is the order of the day.

In general, Unionist hubris is common to both of the factors - nobody finds it appealing except the Unionists themselves and it makes many, even more moderate Unionists, desire to take the DUP down several pegs.

......

So glad to see NS saying what she said today.

PattyPenguin Mon 13-Mar-17 15:18:53
Ireland has a navy, with 8 vessels, and I think mostly deals with fishery protection, search and rescue and smuggling.

It also has an air force with 25 or so craft, which seems to mostly deal with the same kind of work.

Yes indeed, and an army and a police force that is quite good at anti-terrorist work. The army has been an element in counter terrorism ops too.

During WW2 the army was equipped with bikes and some really old vehicles from iirc Belgium. It has come quite a long way since then.

The assumption during WW2 was that Ireland could stay neutral because of the existence of NI. Allied access to NI meant that the allies never bothered invading Ireland. Plus, Britain's interest in defending NI was assumed to extend to an interest in keeping the Nazis out of Ireland. Ireland was actually 'neutral on the Allied side'. In the immediate aftermath of WW2 the US mapped every square inch of the terrain surrounding Shannon Airport, with future operations in mind if necessary. There is absolutely nothing Ireland could do if the US decided to take over bases, harbours, etc., in Ireland or anywhere else for that matter.

I imagine the tariff Scotland currently pays towards UK-wide defense would be diverted back into Scottish coffers. This would fund a useful force or two like the Irish navy and air force and offshore rescue fleet. As LH says, 'sprinkler system in the cowshed' principle would apply for WW3.

I think the point is whether Scotland can remain within the EU, while the rest of the UK leaves. This is very different from the Barroso doctrine. Scotland is being taken out of the EU against its will. There is no precedent for this.

I think this is right - there is no precedent, so there is ample scope for political interpretation with regards to who is leaving whom, and what the consequences will be. I have no doubt that during brexit negotiations, it will be interpreted in whatever way is most conducive to meeting EU objectives.

In order to British democracy, looks like we are having to look to EU to enforce democratic rights.
I think it's a great move by NS, brilliant work by Gina Miller, is there a link to show support to her?

After Brexiters saying a narrow majority wins all, it would be difficult to resist even a 50.1% Indy vote
Don't forget that there's no limit on turnout either. 8 yes votes vs 7 no votes is also enough to change an entire country's course.

Soooo....

Last night really happened did it?

Ok

...plus 16+ voting age and all the resident EU citizens. That majority of whom were, I assume, staunchly pro remaining in the union last time to secure EU membership (not the only factor but a big one). That's a big potential swing already, not including a significant % who can't have failed to notice their "special relationship" with the rUK really ain't worth shit

And I think NS will secure promise of EU membership for Scotland prior to Indyref2. Because this really is her last chance. I remember the days after the referendum when the Westminster bods went awol and Tom Watson went to the shard's silent disco instead. NS went to Brussels with her arms outstretched and begged for Scotland to be allowed to stay in EU. As a person she seems doggedly committed to EU membership for Scotland, epitomizes the EU values set of inclusiveness and DOES STUFF in a very straightforward manner. She's the perfect foil to TM.

Whether independence for Scotland is the best thing for it as a nation, I know not. But I hope it is because I think it's going to happen.

You might want to have a looooooooong lie in

Ok I have a question of thos of you who are much more knowledgeable than me.

www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/03/14/seven-new-brexit-bills-must-passed-article-50-triggered-leaked/
This article says that before the Art50 can be triggered, other bills need to be passed to start detangling us from the UK. This includes bills on taxes, immigration, benefits for eu citizen she etc...

My question is: does it mean that, Ben though we won't have left the EU yet, the immigration rules or taxes will change before the end fo the two years? So in effect, for example, TM can include new rules of what is required for eu citizens to stay in the UK?

What about currency in an independent Scotland though? Even if not forced to take the Euro, can they lay claim to the pound? My DH was trying to convince me last night that they cannot.

It would make most sense to move to Euros, however they could also have a new currency --> Scottish pounds.

I don't think they can retain British pounds because they won't have control of factors which dictate value of the British pound, nor will want to be at its mercy. A separate economic system would be required...so from a complexity reduction standpoint, the Euro would be the fastest way forward.

I guess.

I suspect, if she is half the politician she thinks she is, NS must have an idea this time around.

I bet she has an office full of bulging files with extremely detailed and well thought out plans tackling every single weak point of the last Indy campaign.

Whether or not the maths add up I don't know. But I'm looking forward to finding out.

More Brexit bullshit debunked.

Eight times Brexiteers said leaving the EU wouldn’t mean a Scottish referendum

www.newstatesman.com/politics/media/2017/03/eight-times-brexiteers-said-leaving-eu-wouldn-t-mean-scottish-referendum

At the end of the day, it's entirely up to the people of Scotland what they want to happen in their future.
As with NI (although NI also depends on what the people of Ireland want too).

At the end of negotiations, NS can go to the polls with 2 clear choices:

rUK with the knowledge of what deal that comes with.
Vs
Independent Scotland, with a clear vision of what that entails.

The only problem is that NS will no doubt try to load the vote by including as many people as possible who are more likely to vote to leave UK.
The only people who should be eligible are Scottish resident UK citizens.

It's not as simple as just joining the Euro though. There's various economic criteria to be met first and given the damage inflicted by the Greek fudge in sure they'll be a lot hotter on ensuring these things before rolling it out.

TBH I'm not sure this isn't just a play to remind TM that there is opposition. Maybe not the Opposition but some and some that could be powerful. If faced with a decision of a bad deal because TM couldn't negotiate her way out of a paper bag, hard brexit or take your own chances on attempting to join the eu, if I were Scottish I think I'd rather take the latter.

I don't think they can retain British pounds because they won't have control of factors which dictate value of the British pound, nor will want to be at its mercy

Ultimately, the Pound is underwritten by the Bank of England. Which was the sticking point last time. Salmonds plan was that Scotland could continue t use the Pound, whilst the Bank of England (and thus the rUK) effectively backstopped it.

Which (and it was pointed out mercilessly at the time) is not - repeat not - independence. It would have left Scotland at the mercy of rUK fiscal policy. And - as the post war period showed - England doesn't give a toss about any of the countries it has shafted over the years.

It also led to my opposing Scottish independence ... in the same way Scottish people are rightly sick of being told what to do by Westminster, I was irritated by Alex Salmond telling me what I would do post independence. I think a lot of people felt that way.

And - mentioned previously, the Brexiteers attitude to Brexit is almost a pitch-perfect copy. They are telling the rEU what the rEU is going to have to do post Brexit. And - just like IndyRef#1 - the rEU is raising an eyebrow whilst saying ..."Vraiment ?", "Veramente ?", "ja wirklich ?", "werkelijk ?", "De Verdad ?".

Before 23rd June, my stock observation when discussing the vote was that - irrespective of anything else - the Leave argument was predicated upon the rEU acting in the way that Leave were mandating, with absolutely no hint of why they would act that way beyond "oh, they will". If nothing else, the Brexit process has been a long drawn out intelligence test, as slowly the number of Brexiteers who still believe that diminishes. Even BoJo has stopped with his blustery splutter about how everyone is going to do the Brexit foxtrot to the UKs tune. I can only presume someone has finally explained Foxtrot Oscar to him.

Bouncing around a bit, there's also a hilarious irony that Scotland has already had a dry run at independence, and seen a lot of companies with Scottish offices (I'm looking at you, Standard Life) move out of Scotland as a precaution in 2014. So not only have Scottish firms contemplated independence. They know what it's like to move countries at the prospect of political change. One up on their UK peers.

The question for me is, which does Theresa May want most, making a success of Brexit? Or being known as the person who caused the UK to split?

There may be an element of play in Nicola Sturgeon's stance, but not entirely. As Poundland said, a few posts back, NS was the one who jumped on a plane to go to Brussels immediately after the result, Cameron threw in the towel and retreated somewhere and Johnson went off to play cricket.

It's not as simple as just joining the Euro though. There's various economic criteria to be met first and given the damage inflicted by the Greek fudge in sure they'll be a lot hotter on ensuring these things before rolling it out.

Scotland is a very well run country with a strong sense of identity, and a proven track record of responsible fiscal policy. It's hard to think of a country less like Greece within Europe. Even before we consider the Auld alliance (once again I get snipey comments in discussions for "knowing stuff") I suspect there would be a lot of goodwill for a Scotland in the EU. And if some of that goodwill is a reaction to the UKs and Theresa Mays attitude to Brexit ... well, suck it up. |It's not like she wasn't warned - before we even knew she was to be PM - that the negotiations were incredibly sensitive. As far as I'm concerned she - and the UK - can reap what we have sown.

Idle speculation again, but would the UK retain it's veto during A50 ? Quite aside from the possibility that the rEU might use the A50 window to really piss the UK off, it would be suggestive regarding any Scottish move to join the EU ... they wouldn't want to apply until after the UK couldn't veto.

The only problem is that NS will no doubt try to load the vote by including as many people as possible who are more likely to vote to leave UK.

You mean in the same way that the Tories, in order to appease their loony wing, weighted the referendum in favour of leave by disenfranchising Britons living in the EU?

The question for me is, which does Theresa May want most, making a success of Brexit? Or being known as the person who caused the UK to split?

Don't you get it, yet ?

Theresa May's to-do list, looks like this:

#1) Ensure the Tory party remains intact for the 2020 elections.
#2) er ... that's it.