Westministenders: Its Really Not Getting Any Better Is It?

[RedToothBrush]

We are STILL on collision course for no deal.

Christmas is here, and whilst we might appreciate the respite from Brexit News, its really a luxury we can't afford.

The meaningful vote is scheduled for January.

Chaos is scheduled for shortly after.

I wish you all a happy and enjoyable Christmas.

I agree we lose a LOT if we just end up with the backstop,
but we do keep all those SM protections against the worst that the hard right can do.

So, worse than Remain, but better than No Deal.

and that is the ^worst case:

There is increasingly a cross-party HoC move to an SM+CU / CA Brexit + agencies + many other goodies

There's no time for that before Brexit, but - from reports close to the EU side -
that could be achieved if the UK wants, during transition negotiations, as a 3rd EE pillar

Tatiana That is my point:
the backstop keeps many of the SM rights - for GB, not just NI - which protect us against the hard right
and prevents e.g. a US FTA

So the WA is significantly inferior to Remain
but it is absolutely NOT as bad as No Deal

and it gives at least the hope of the full 3rd EEA pillar SM+CU+other stuff

Did you kiss the bit that the backstop is not just the CU, but most SM rules for GB as well ?

kiss 😂 miss

The backstop is NOT just for a limited period.
If there is no trade deal, then the backstop becomes permanent

So GB is not just in the CU, but laso has to keep the SM rules / rights too.

That would be permanent, but the EU would like something better too, so if this / a future UK govt sees sense,
I'm sure the EU would negotiate a new trade deal with full SM, or let the UK Rejoin under A49

That is my point: the backstop keeps many of the SM rights - for GB, not just NI - which protect us against the hard right

Only as long as we are in it.

While we are in it the hard right will be negotiating our FTA.

The backstop is PERMANENT
May - and the ERG - keep demanding it be time-limited, but the EU/RoI refuse

The backstop will be activated unless there is an FTA with similar provisions (or - politically impossible - full checks on goods from GB to NI)

So, after transition, it is either the backstop or an FTA with CU+SM etc
and even that FTA will have the backstop in it as a provision if the UK ever withdraws from the FTA

The negotiation will be during transition - which imo will have to be extended a few years even for an SM+CU 3rd EEA pillar deal

If at the end of the transition there is no FTA that fulfills all the backstop conditions, then the backstop is activated and is permanent
... until the UK agrees to that 3rd EEA pillar deal or Rejoins the EU

Reminder of recent wins against the far right:

In Hungary, the Momentum Movement is fighting back against Orban in Hungary, with considerable public support
and ...

Anne Applebaumm@anneapplebaum*

Significant victory for the European Union, and for European values.
The Polish government has been forced to obey Poland's constitution^

Poland reverses Supreme Court Purge, retreating from conflict with EU

<a class="break-all" href="https://www.nytimes.com/2018/12/17/world/europe/poland-supreme-court.html#click=t.co/Cc4yA7cfzh" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">https://www.nytimes.com/2018/12/17/world/europe/poland-supreme-court.html#click=t.co/Cc4yA7cfzh

mother I wonder if Labour will support it or abstain / bother to turn up
Of course, the DUP won't support an FTPA-compliant NC vote unless the WA is passed

I went out and lost the thread of the thread...has this been seen

stv.tv/news/politics/1433895-snp-tables-vote-of-no-confidence-in-uk-government/

Don't see how the SNP can get the numbers when Corbs can't?

Sorry just seen Mother posted it already. I don't get how it can gain enough support?

The open border in NI is permanent. The backstop is an insurance policy guaranteeing that.

The backstop is for a limited period until the trade deal is negotiated for trade that is so frictionless that there would be no border.

But the Tories want an FTA and frictionless FTAs do not exist anywhere. So to achieve that, the Tories would have to leave NI in the backstop.

I think its T May scaremongering and trying to frighten HoC. Why mention 3,500 troops? She's trying to scare all the country too!
Cameron has so much to answer for! He did not listen to the people and now we have this disaster! Is there a way we could take him to task? I feel like making him pay dearly for this chaos.

mother NO, you've misunderstood
It's not just NI - that's the point !

When May demanded a CU, the EU insisted on a level playing field for their business, so they weren't disadvantaged competing against a UK that had thrown out all the expensive SM rules on workers rights etc

So Barnier copied in all the relevant SM rules as well

The backstop

• It is permanent
• The whole UK is in the CU
• NI is in the SM
• GB follows all SM rules on food standards, trade, workers rights, environment, ECJ to rule + a few other things

As I have said, May says that the backstop will never be required
because she deludedly thinks FTAs can deliver customs-free frictionless trade. There isn't one FTA in existence which does that. It requires CU-SM. Under FTA, the original NI backstop will still be required, where only NI stays in CU-SM.

Tatiana The govt cannot just leave NI in the backstop, because the backstop covers GB as well, see last post
SO FTA must be SM+CU+etc

Any FTA will also almost certainly contain a clause that if the Uk withdraws from the compliant FTA, then the backstop is actiavted again

.... unless the UK plan Irish reunifiation without consulting the RoI govt or NI

No, there is no FTA that can satisfy the backstop
That is why the Tories are so desperate to change the backstop.

Otherwise, the deal can't be an FTA, only SM+CU+etc 3rd EEA pillar, i.e. like the EU but without voting rights

and if there is no deal, then the backstop is automatically activated after transition and is permanent
.... until the Uk Rejoins or asks for EEA 3rd pillar deal