Westministenders: The One Where We Finally Get A Leadership Challenge?

[RedToothBrush]

Tick tick tick.

What do we think?

Yes? No?

Another week of wtf-ing at British politics.

I wonder if BCF and RTB have a verrsion of an advent calendar that they started 3 years ago with their thoughts about Brexit.

Would it be very I" told you so ish" to compare it with what has now come to pass.

From a legal point of view, one of the problems with the WA is that in the absence is a Norway+ type of final agreement, the backstop comes into play, and the U.K. can’t unilaterally exit the backstop. That means that unless there is a comprehensive soft Brexit type of agreement (take EU rules with very little say), we will essentially have to follow EU rules indefinitely unless the EU agrees that we can exit the backstop.

Basically, it significantly reduces our sovereignty, in a way that is worse than under no Brexit or a no-deal Brexit.

I’m a remainer, but find this very problematic. Also, in terms of business supporting it, the CBI speaks for large businesses, and of course a transition is better for them than a cliff edge, but they have the resources to relocate if the final agreement isn’t good. Small business don’t have this luxury and are very worried.

All businesses are very worried about any constraints on FoM.

There are no tangible benefits of Brexit, except for those who hate FOM

^The benefits of The WA compared to No Dealare that we have a transition period - maybe 10 years longer than May claims - to negotiate a trade deal with the EU

During this transition, we retain all current benefits including FOM^
A govt with fresh idea could change the proposed deal, e.g. to Norway++ if they want - the EU would prefer that, so would be willing.

No Deal means No Transition, just the country falling off a cliff:

international flights grounded, ports logjammed, JIT supply chains wrecked, businesses going broke or leaving the country, unempoyment rising by millions, possible shortages of essential medicines and food

The country would be hammered for decades;
in fact longterm Leave campaigner Richard North has even said before that he fears Britain might never recover, but instead spiral into a permanently broken economy,

e.g. like some bad decisions in the 1920s & 1930s caused Argentina to collapse from one of the richest countries in the world to a permanent basket case.

I posted earlier that the Association of Small Businesses said this WA was much better than No Deal

It will give NI a competitive advantage over the rest of the UK probably indefinitely

Yes, I can't understand why the DUP aren't jumping for joy, they are not very clever are they?

To me the WA is basically putting a framework around the EUs 4 pillars in a way that won't actually kill off UK manufacture and services for now. It will take some hard negotiation to actually make anything 'good' from it as it is a plan for a holding pattern.
Whether EU business in the UK have already decided to leave is a whole different ballgame to which those orchestrating the NDAs have far greater insight although there is no reason for those industries to have made plans to leave and not disclose this to UK gov.
I don't think the UK gov can pile heaps of cash into the various industries as it would give them a competitive advantage (at taxpayers expense of course).
Therte was a picture on SKY news this morning of an MP showing off ball skills. What is that all about? Bored of discussing Brexit or anything else will we have a succession of jugglers and mime artists to keep us entertained until 29 March? Maybe BoJo doing the balloon dance?

Thank you for your answers-i am just trying to get my head around the objections to it.

I completely agree that Northern Ireland and all the complexities surrounding it are the "big issue"-nobody wants the backstop. Am i right in thinking the only way a backstop comes into pkay is if no agreement is reached by end of transition AND there is no extension to the transition?

MissMoon The Uk always retains the power to leave the CU and the backstop:
it just can't keep all the benefits

Same situation s now, really
but hopefully during the zransition period, this penny will finally drop

The main point about the WA is that it gives time, maybe 10 years depending on the extension decided,
for govts and ideas to change radically
while life ´including FOM - continues as now

Imaging Labour after Corbyn has retired, a more moderate Tory leader
If either or both of the 2 parties become functianl again during transition, that cumbersome CU is dead and Norway++ is on

I agree @WringingOut . Being a special economic area is a fantastic opportunity.

That's right Lex the backstop only comes into play if the UK govt remains very stupid nd stubborn for years

btw, NOT true to say noone wants the backstop:
The Republic of Ireland insisted on it for any WA and for any future trade deal.

So, the EU supported a littlê country, that is a member, against a much bigger non-member that invaded and has been oppressing it for the last 800 years - no wonder the RoI don't trust us and demand a backstop.

Thank you-that does make it clearer. And thank you for pointing out RoI are pro backstop that of course makes perfect sense. I am grateful for you clarifying these points, because most of what I have so far read from the media/politicians has been sensationalist catastrophising over WA, when it seemed to me the points of complaint were what brexit meant in the first place.

The thought of relying on the UK government to not remain stubborn and stupid is not a very promising prospect though.

NI would have a massive advantage over Scotland for example. Scotland would (will) be decimated by the deal.

NI businesses & some farmers realise the opportunities and have come out in favour of it.

There is a bitter row going on with them and Jeffrey Donaldson, a DUP MP, who claims they don't understand the implications for business

• he's an arrogant sod; of course they understand their businesses

His objections are partly because he doesn't want to increase the checks that already take place between GB and NI

but mainly because the DUP have always seen Brexit as their last chance to smash the GFA and revert to Unionist domination in perpetuity over NI Catholics

I could not understand the DUP opposition either. What are the (non backstop) options for the NI border that uphold GFA? Or is that the fundamental problem-there aren't any?

Are there scenarios where SNP would abstain in Brexit vote? ConservativeHome have put up a range of number calculations as to how the Government might win a vote which involve SNP abstaining...also, if anyone knows, why do some MPs (i.e. other than Irish ones) not vote? www.conservativehome.com/thetorydiary/2018/11/need-to-be-able-to-count.html

GD12 Scotland is right to be pissed off that a remnant of Empire that Britain refused to let go in the early 2ßth century may disadvantage them now

I would expect that any responsible UK govt 🤔 would invest in Scotland to compensate for this. Let's see.

However, If the deal is not changed during transition, before it comes into effect
and if Scotland hasn't joined the EU or EFTA itself during those years

... that's several years of transition to negotiate a deal, then usually a transition period into a deal

^^Indeed

On a side note, my husband came to me today with a cruise that starts on the 29th March and is super cheap, he wants o book it. I've tried explaining the reason it's so cheap and told him no way! He just doesn't seem to worry or "get" what's happening. Infuriating!

.

Lex The GFA never even considered that the UK would leave the EU, because back in the 1990s it was not within the realms of serious politics

The GFA made the border invisible, so that NI Nationalists could ignore the fact they were living in the UK and not a united Ireland.
It was a major reason for NI Catholics and the RoI voting so heavily in favour of the GFA in the GFA referenda.
A hard border, even just for goods, would destroy the spirit of that consensus.

The RoI, as part of their duties under the GFA, even changed their constitution, to no longer lay claim to NI, but to accept it would only unite with the RoI if NI chose in a future referendum to do so

There are at last count 143 areas of cross-border cooperation, which might be hindered by a harder border:

https://www.rte.ie/news/brexit/2018/1119/1011801-brexit-northern-ireland/

EU Ombudsman Emily O'Reilly has called on the European Commission to publish a key document
spelling out all the areas of North-South co-operation under the Good Friday Agreement that are at risk because of Brexit.

The confidential document deals with the so-called mapping exercise,
which became a key plank of the Irish Government's strategy to highlight the risks to the Good Friday Agreement.

The mapping exercise highlights the extent to which North-South co-operation relies upon, or is enhanced by, mutual EU membership by both Ireland and the UK.

DG You might mention that WW2 is the reason why Britain - and several other European countries - lost their Empire and superpower status

and the UK sold off its foreign assets accumulated over centuries, became enmired in WW2 debt that it only finsihed paying in 2006, over 60 years later
(It also wasted its Marshall Aid on trying to stay a military superpower)

and all the UK patents for science, inventions, business processes were given to the US as one of the requirements for US help

All this is why WW2 made the US the dominant superpower - because all the former Great Powers were buried under heaps of rubble that were their industrial powerhouses, infrastructure, cities, houses

Thank you that is a very detailed answer. So in short, no, there isnt a solution that upholds the realtive stability of the current situation? Apart from the backstop, which is problematic more for the UK rather than NI/Ireland?

Thanks for taking the time to explain to me.

Listening to May on PMQs telling us all that we voted for when we voted to leave the EU.

I must have had a defective ballot paper because I don't remember remember any of them being stated on it. It just said Leave or Remain. It didn't say leaving the EEA, the Single Market, Euratom, EHCR.

I don't support this WA at all and i'm as remain as they come.

Barnier has already said he will offer a max 2 year extension, so 2022, not 10 years but still 4 years of being subject to EU rules with zero say and paying in substantial amounts of money.

Once this deal is in place, that's it!!! we have absolutely no idea what we will end up with or have any say in that either, of course once we have left the threat to the EU of no deal reduces our negotiating leverage.

If this WA fails, then other options can be looked into; revoke, 2nd vote (even if Leave won again) or even no-deal but it will be in our hands.

Alberto Nardelli@AlbertoNardelli (Buzzfeed)

1. lots of spin that UK will seek technological solutions to avoid the backstop.

The whole point of the backstop is it’s to be used until/unless an alternative solution is found. It’s irrelevant if that solution is technological, future arrangements or a plan called hippopotamus