Westministenders: Transition

[RedToothBrush]

Last thread opener, it was all about the government buzz word being shown to listen at every opportunity.

Now transition is creeping in as people realise that no we can't just do a settlement, arrange a new trade deal with the EU and have a whole host of other deals in place in two years.

Who'd have thought.

We will be getting Brexit because we give in to threats of terrorism. Not quite getting how that takes back control.

But Brexit will be good. It will be glorious. And in the long term we will be better off for it.

Er ok.

When entering a negotiation it's unwise not to have a position. Even on some things. To not refute that really makes the UK looks naive at best. The whole thing is a tacit admission that they came unprepared. Even Bojo unaided could have spun his way out of that.

Bigchoc there are specialist importers of Irn Bru to the US even if it does come at a price. While I was there the US and EU were having a bit of a stand off (it was wine or banana or similar related) which was leading to all sorts of unwanted spillovers for my Scottish home comforts. I actually prefer Californian wine to French but US cheese and chocolate are just wrong.

More from Faisal Islam via twitter

Barnier, answering q on ECJ jurisdiction points out Norway has an arrangement that "dovetails with the ECJ" via the European Economic Area
For me, this is Barnier gently suggesting a role for the EFTA Court... as a compromise
Think EU citizens issue probably pretty solvable right now - Brussels gives way a bit on ECJ, UK on int'l arbitration -EFTA Court or similar
... apparently Norway has arbitration panel of some sort re application of Schengen - so there's a precedent here... money & NI = difficult

howabout I can see how Davis might be in a bind similar (but worse) to Cameron's when he was trying to negotiate with the EU before the referendum: The difficulty of balancing the expectations of the public against the reality that in a negotiation, concessions are made. If he doesn't get everything he asks for (which he wont) there are many who will see that as a terrible failure at best, and a deliberate betrayal at worst.

Squishy, that implies Davis is interested in a deal....

Arj Singh @ singharj
^UK may have to set up its own health insurance scheme for
tourists holidaying in EU countries after Brexit as Brussels wants to limit EHIC^

And for UK citizens living in the EU permanently?

Brussels gives way a bit on ECJ

Will this require ratification by referendum in some members ?

Unlike the UK, the EU tends to be democratic ...

Good point Red.

UK may have to set up its own health insurance scheme for tourists holidaying in EU countries after Brexit as Brussels wants to limit EHIC

I imagine a Tory government will just expect tourists to arrange and pay for their own insurance. (You really need insurance even now, but the existence of the EHIC reduces the cost.)

See this on Fb:

BREAKING: Andrea Leadsom devastated to learn of Jane Austen's passing. Cancels today's photo-op with William Shakespeare as mark of respect

I agree with you on DD's bind re the UK audience squishy.

@alanbeattie (ft)
Worth noting most pressers in middle of negotiations are non-committal. Even allowing for that, doesn't seem much got done. #BarnierDavis

Replying @bethrigby (sky)
Also worth noting @DavidDavisMP seemed far more upbeat than @MichelBarnier. Almost as if he didn't hear what Barnier said on #ECJ/citizens

Replying @rafaelbehr
I think key difference between them was that DD knows he has to sound upbeat for domestic audience. MB has no-one he really needs to bluff.

The smoke and mirrors machine isn't working so well.

With the usual caveat about TAATs, I notice another one popping up where some people seem to have not understood the implications of Brexit and citizenship.

I'm noticing a trend that questions (not just on Mumsnet) which are specific and detailed don't attract any Brexiteer comments. It's almost as if facts are toxic to Brexit ....

LH noooooo, surely not...

Meanwhile Britons could lose the right to move within the EU post Brexit

but clearly we still don't need experts.

No wonder there are issues negotiating with the EU as an entity when it so often manages to be divisible and indivisible simultaneously

The reason DD doesn't want to be specific has nothing to do with Barnier
but everything to do with UK party politics:

DD doesn't dare announce willingness to compromise on anything, or the Brexit Ultras in the Tory party and media will destroy him.

The govt has no plan, because it doesn't dare make one,
It has made promises to the voters and raised expectations that are impossible.
Entirely their own stupidity.

Thei govt's overwhelmingly worry is that the UK public will find things out, not that Barnier or the E27 will.

In contrast, Barnier agreed a clear negotiating position with all 27 member countries and has kept to it.
He publishes all their position papers online, which is standard EU practice.
He answers most questions pretty clearly at press conferences, whereas DD just waffles.

Some of the very vocal Brexiters have gone very quiet.

I suspect it's finally dawned on the UK that it simply can't clear the first hurdle of EU citizens rights.

I can easily imagine that before they actually had to sit down to debate, they thought that UK government SOP would actually work outside the UK. That being to shout down any opposition or contrary evidence, and then hold up whatever dogs breakfast emerges with a "ta da !"

I can easily see the only possible outcome as being impossible politically. And that's because the UK is going to end up protecting EU citizens rights over UK citizens rights.

My particular example would be with the GDPR which the UK will enact next year (May 2018). After Brexit, the UK will have to continue providing GDPR protections to EU citizens (assuming we want to trade), while flushing them down the toilet for UK citizens.

To an extent it has already been doing this LH which is part of the problem.

I justify retaining current expat rights, including appeal to the ECJ on 3 main grounds:

1. It maintains rights that this specific group have held for decades, i.e. "acquired" rights, on which many based major life decisions that often cannot be reversed without hardship to them or their families.
2. Unlike UK citizens, E27 expats cannot influence politicians by voting on their concerns in GEs.
3. If rights were only protected by Uk courts, this or any future UK govt can make new laws reducing rights - and UK judges will have to enforce these laws.

My proposals:

• Only applicable to expats who have became resident before cutoff date of when A50 was invoked - after this, they would have been well aware of the possible risks.
• Any expats who arrived after this would have the reduced rights that the UK govt proposes
• All expats before cutoff date to have same rights to state healthcare as native citizens. Those after would have this right after 6 months residence.
• All govts (UK & E27) to continue refunding state healthcare for those in receipt of their state pension
• All govts to pay state pension just as if they had returned home - together with all increases, plus any additional benefits like winter heating payment.
• Spouses and DC resident before the cutoff retain full lifetime rights, as do their descendants (I'm thinking of GC etc not having to leave the only country they know)
• Spouses and DC after cutoff have rights as UK go to proposals

I'm surprised the U.k. govt is asking at this stage about EHIC for tourists - it seems trivial.

They should be concentrating on expats who have made their lives in another country and would experience hardship if they lose rights,
not those who choose a holiday after Brexit, knowing they need health insurance, just as for the USA (well, actually much cheaper than for the US)

Those on business trips etc would normally have health insurance from their employer

bigchoc it's not that surprising though is it? Pretty bang on form for them

Japan asks why has Britain gone mad?

https://infacts.org/japan-asks-britain-gone-mad/

Acknowledges its self interest - but points out that as we have said frequently on here that "access to the Single Market" is not the same as "access in the single market" - pointing out that that was WHY they had built factories in the EU.

It's so blindingly obvious unless you are continuing to stick your head in the sand

I can easily imagine that before they actually had to sit down to debate, they thought that UK government SOP would actually work outside the UK. That being to shout down any opposition or contrary evidence, and then hold up whatever dogs breakfast emerges with a "ta da !"

We've been members of the EU for 43 years and, in all that time, failed to grasp how the EU negotiates. Speaks volumes, doesn't it?