Does anyone here actively WANT no deal?

[justintimberlakesfishwife]

And if so why, and how do you expect it to play out if that's the outcome?

Article 50 only deals with the withdrawal of a Member State from the EU and does not provide for the negotiation of an agreement on the future relationship between the
EU and the withdrawing member.

Ireland has, from the very beginning, insisted that the GFA be protected. There were some efforts by the UK to kick that down the road but as we have long and bitter experience of British perfidiousness, we stood firm on that one.

Have a look at merrionstreet.ie/en/EU-UK/Key_Irish_Documents/Government_Approach_to_Brexit_Negotiations.pdf for the Irish position.

@why

Article 50 reads:

"A Member State which decides to withdraw shall notify the European Council of its intention. In the light of the guidelines provided by the European Council, the Union shall negotiate and conclude an agreement with that State, setting out the arrangements for its withdrawal, taking account of the framework for its future relationship with the Union

EU appointed negotiator is Michel Barnier as is tasked with negotiating with UK on behalf of EU in accordance with EU Article 218. This article does not reference a phase approach.

The document you reference is an internal Irish Government paper as opposed to the Article 50 signed by all 28 members of the EU in 2009. It is dated May 2017, whereas the briefing note prepared by EU was dated February 2016 before the referendum.

I've just seen on the Times website that the £ is at a 5 week high due to the fears of no deal receding.

So, no-dealers, why do you think that might be? It's not because leaving without a deal would be a good thing, is it?

setting out the arrangements for its withdrawal, taking account of the framework for its future relationship with the Union

And that is done in the WA and the PD. Deals cannot be agreed while the UK is still in the EU.

@berlinbabylon - I've just seen on the Times website that the £ is at a 5 week high due to the fears of no deal receding.

Damn. I should have done all my UK online purchases earlier in the week

I've just seen on the Times website that the £ is at a 5 week high due to the fears of no deal receding

That’s fine if you have a currency that was established 5 weeks ago but the bigger picture is what’s happened over a longer period. This graph shows GBP against EUR over the past 5 years. In particular, activity from 2017 onwards.

Also, markets react well to stability. A jump doesn’t mean that no deal is a good thing, it just means that the recent political activities have stabilised a risk.

I work in the NHS and no one is worried, all scare tactics to provoke a reaction

I work in the NHS and everyone I know is very concerned. No deal will be a catastrophe for patient care.

And that is done in the WA and the PD. Deals cannot be agreed while the UK is still in the EU

Yes they can, but post dated to the day after departure from the EU or worded so that they only become effective the day after UK leaves the EU.

Ever heard of post dated cheques? The deal is agreed in advance, but does not become effective until later.

Yes they can, but post dated to the day after departure from the EU or worded so that they only become effective the day after UK leaves the EU.

Discussions can take place. A deal cannot be completed. It would also be inappropriate to move on to deals until the major issue of the GFA is resolved as you would just be shooting in the dark and wasting time, money and effort on something that may not be possible. That has been Ireland's position from the beginning. There was an element of fudge in the early stages but once it became clear that the UK was not willing to seriously consider the GFA, the EU, at the insistence of Ireland, stalled any further discussions until the issue of protecting the GFA was resolved.

My FIL wants no deal. And is a big Farage fan. My FIL is a dickhead though.

Discussions can take place

As they are meant to in accordance with Article 50.

A deal cannot be completed

The deal does not become binding until the effective date. That can worded so that is the day after UK leaves the EU. So the deal starts after UK is out of EU and there is overlap or conflict with previous agreements.

It would also be inappropriate to move on to deals until the major issue of the GFA is resolved as you would just be shooting in the dark and wasting time, money and effort on something that may not be possible

Can you please tell me where it says in Article 50, or any other EU articles, that GFA takes priority? You have stated in a previous post that GFA is not part of EU law

the EU, at the insistence of Ireland, stalled any further discussions until the issue of protecting the GFA was resolved

The EU briefing note that stated discussion would be in two phases was dated January 2017 which is before UK triggered Article 50 and negotiations commenced. How had EU concluded before any discussion had commenced that UK did not intend to take GFA into account?

How can you stall a discussion that has not already started?

No deal will be disastrous - as per Operation Yellowhammer which describes a base scenario, not a worst case.

No deal means that every trade deal and arrangement we have with other countries will have to be negotiated - we have all those deals through the EU, so they no longer apply when we leave the EU.

The idea that WTO terms are great is utterly wrong. Tariffs will make good more expensive. Non tariff barriers will make goods more expensive and will likely cause severe delays.

The debate about Brexit will not end after a no deal. We will have to enter into some sort of negotiation with the EU. It will take years.
We will have to enter into negotiations with other countries and it will take years. Each time with some additional issue - do we privatise the NHS, do we allow GMO, chlorinated chicken, lower food standards, austerity measures, less funding for schools, social services and health services.

Border controls of some sort will be needed at the border between RoI and NI, and that will likely cause unrest - something we should do everything to avoid.

No deal will absolute f**k up the country, not just in the short term, but long term too.
It is absolutely not the way to make the shit show end, and it is absolutely ignorant and naive to think that the situation cannot get worse than it is now. No deal will make everything worse.

That can worded so that is the day after UK leaves the EU.

That is the purpose of the transition period. Deals are to be agreed during that period in order to minimise disruption.

Can you please tell me where it says in Article 50, or any other EU articles, that GFA takes priority? You have stated in a previous post that GFA is not part of EU law

Can you please tell me where it states it doesn't take priority? The Union shall negotiate and conclude an agreement with that State, setting out the arrangements for its withdrawal, taking account of the framework for its future relationship with the Union Therefore, any issues (for example, the GFA) which will impact on the future framework must be considered.

How had EU concluded before any discussion had commenced that UK did not intend to take GFA into account?

They didn't need to conclude that. They only needed to conclude what order things needed to be done in order to ensure the process took EU red lines into account. A deal without clarity and agreement on citizens' rights or protection of the GFA or the divorce bill would require multiple potential deals to be agreed as the type of deal offered would be very different depending on what was agreed here.

@RiskIt4Biscuit - No deal will absolute fk up the country, not just in the short term, but long term too.

And what really pisses me off is that it will also fuck up Ireland's economy and the carefully crafted peace and relative prosperity (compared to the past) that currently exists in NI.

Can you please tell me where it states it doesn't take priority? The Union shall negotiate and conclude an agreement with that State, setting out the arrangements for its withdrawal, taking account of the framework for its future relationship with the Union

This refers to the leaving member relationship with the European Union in terms of trade, freedom of movement, etc. Not related to any agreements individual members may have made between themselves to which EU is not a signatory.

Check your previous post where you acknowledge that GFA is not written into EU law. Article 50 can't include the GFA as not written into EU law. If you read articles 207 and 218 that describe how the negotiations take place there is no reference to the GFA.

They didn't need to conclude that

So why were the discussions, that had not started, stalled when it allegedly become apparent that UK did not intend to recognize GFA?

order to ensure the process took EU red lines into account

Where does Article 50 make reference to EU red lines? Red lines, if any, do not exclude the possibility of a member leaving the EU without a deal. GFA can't be an EU red line as GFA is not part of EU law.

No GFA isn't part of EU law but one of its remaining members is a signatory to it. The leaving member is too but doesn't appear to give a fuck about it.

"No GFA isn't part of EU law*

Correct. Looks like you and WhyAmI are on the same page.

NI only backstop would solve the problem, but how do you get it to the table?

Correct. Looks like you and WhyAmI are on the same page.

So what is your point? The GFA is relevant as it is an agreement with a member state so will obviously impact on relationships post exit. It will obviously then be a factor in withdrawal discussions and any deals, agreements etc.

So why were the discussions, that had not started, stalled when it allegedly become apparent that UK did not intend to recognize GFA?

My comments wrt Ireland refusing to continue discussions until the GFA issue was sorted referred to the discussions post invocation of A50. The UK was originally giving airy fairy assurances they would uphold the GFA. Once it became apparent this was simply an attempt to kick the can down the road, Ireland insisted on agreement on this. Apologies, I can see that I was not clear.

Article 50 can't include the GFA as not written into EU law.

A50 refers to discussions relating to future relationships. If there is an agreement that impacts on future relationships between the leaving party and the EU or any member of the EU, then of course it must be considered in any discussions on future relationships. Not to do so would be negligent.

Where does Article 50 make reference to EU red lines? Red lines, if any, do not exclude the possibility of a member leaving the EU without a deal. GFA can't be an EU red line as GFA is not part of EU law.

You really don't seem to understand any of this. The EU can decide on red lines that will impact on deals, in the same way the UK can and did. A50 allows for discussions on the future relationship between the EU and the leaving party. These discussions took place and led to the WA and the PD. Once these are agreed, it is then possible to consider the detail of future deals as the content of these would have a material effect on the deals. Not to have agreed these first would result in the requirement of a series of if...then...else type discussions. Majorly inefficient. A phased approach where the starting point is agreed allows sensible negotiation on deals.

The GFA is relevant as it is an agreement with a member state so will obviously impact on relationships post exit

But not an agreement with the EU. Remember that the EU is not an individual country, but a name for a collection of independent countries that joined a common club.

I recall that you corrected me when I referenced by mistake that the MEP Meiread McGuiness was from UK by saying that Ireland is an independent country.

A contract can only exist between two parties or entities. EU is an entity of its own. The 28 members have agreement with EU as a single entity. The EU draws up the rules for each of the members to follow. If members make separate agreements with each other that is their private business. Such agreement does not flow into the EU as part of EU law.

Example

A company, EU, employs three people; Engs, Frog and Germ. Each of the employees have a contract with their employer. If any of them want to resign they serve notice to EU in accordance with EU rules they as individuals agreed.

If Frog has made a deal with Germ outside of work, the employer, EU, is not interested as not party to the deal.

So if Frog resigns from EU, Germ can't say to EU it is not allowed as Frog has a deal with me and if Frog leaves EU I might be disadvantaged.

Easy when you think about it logically and rationally as opposed to subjectively and emotionally.

My comments wrt Ireland refusing to continue discussions until the GFA issue was sorted referred to the discussions post invocation of A50

The withdrawal briefing document 7551 was issued by EU in Jan 2017 was different to what they issued in February 2016. So EU moved the goalposts after the referendum. Bit naughty that don't you think?

The EU withdrawal briefing issued in January 2017 was two months before UK invoked Article 50. So even before discussions began EU had decided on a 2 phase approach of WA first and trade second even though Article developed 8 years earlier said otherwise.

So how do you explain that discussion was stalled post invoke A50 to separate WA and trade when EU had decided that was their preferred procedure (against UK preference to conduct both at the same time in accordance with Article 50 agreed in 2009 and the EU briefing note issued in January 2016 before the referendum) before any discussion began?

If there is an agreement that impacts on future relationships between the leaving party and the EU or any member of the EU, then of course it must be considered in any discussions on future relationships

UK is leaving the EU as a single entity and not 27 separate countries who have their own individual contracts with the EU as a single entity. GFA is not written into EU law remember.

The EU can decide on red lines that will impact on deals, in the same way the UK can and did

EU has red lines for accession to the EU (standards, codes, security, etc) and applications to become a member have to be accepted by all existing members.

There are no EU red lines for withdrawal from the EU detailed in Article 50 and withdrawal by a member does not have to be approved by the other members.

@MysteryTripAgain - But not an agreement with the EU

It does not have to be an agreement with the EU for it to impact on the EU. The UK is leaving the EU. Therefore, agreement on how that is done happens with the EU, which as you rightly say, is a collection of countries. As the UK is not negotiating with the individual countries, all agreements that impact on the exit must be considered as part of the overall exit agreement, otherwise it will lead to problems down the line.

So even before discussions began EU had decided on a 2 phase approach of WA first and trade second even though Article developed 8 years earlier said otherwise.

A very sensible approach. And A50 did not say otherwise. It states that discussions can take place in tandem, not that deals can or must be negotiated in tandem.

UK is leaving the EU as a single entity and not 27 separate countries who have their own individual contracts with the EU as a single entity. GFA is not written into EU law remember.

I'm sorry but that statement makes no sense at all. The GFA impacts on future relationships as it relates to a border between the EU and the UK.

There are no EU red lines for withdrawal from the EU detailed in Article 50 and withdrawal by a member does not have to be approved by the other members.

No, withdrawal does not have to be approved. However, a deal does have to be approved.

It does not have to be an agreement with the EU for it to impact on the EU. The UK is leaving the EU. Therefore, agreement on how that is done happens with the EU, which as you rightly say, is a collection of countries. As the UK is not negotiating with the individual countries, all agreements that impact on the exit must be considered as part of the overall exit agreement, otherwise it will lead to problems down the line

How does impact, if any, on GFA by UK leaving the EU affect how the other 26 EU members can trade with each other or the rest off the World?

It states that discussions can take place in tandem, not that deals can or must be negotiated in tandem

Nor did it state that deals MUST NOT be negotiated in tandem.

The GFA impacts on future relationships as it relates to a border between the EU and the UK

So UK follows the vague WTO comments on border and EU follows their rules on borders like they do in Eastern Europe

*However, a deal does have to be approved"

Article 50 acknowledges that no deal may occur. That requires no approval at all from any member. Refer back to the employment example. Anyone can serve notice to their employer. They don't need to seek approval from the other employees

The good news is that @MysteryTripAgain rarely posts and snarls at people who do.

The good news is that @MysteryTripAgain rarely posts and snarls at people who do

Snarls, insults, etc., do not achieve anything other than to discourage others from listening and talking part in a sensible and mature discussion on how to solve the problems.

Your posts regularly use inappropriate language and suggest that your opinions are the only opinions that are valid. QRemember that prolonged back and forth exchange between yourself and bear behind. What a yawn.

There are approximately 7 billion people on the planet. Each of them are entitled their own opinion regardless of what the other 6,999,999,999 chose to think.

You are entitled to think that the GFA is: law of the World, the Holy Grail, takes priority over the 10 commandments, etc.

but that does not oblige the other 6,999,999,999 in the world to think the same.

Bloody hell @Mysterytripagain, do you want the bombing and shooting to start again?

@MysteryTripAgain - How does impact, if any, on GFA by UK leaving the EU affect how the other 26 EU members can trade with each other or the rest off the World?

As I'm sure you know, a border of a member state is an EU border.

Nor did it state that deals MUST NOT be negotiated in tandem.

So? It also doesn't say that members leaving are not allowed to cherry pick.

Doing a deal in advance of agreeing elements that would impact on a deal would be wasteful of time and resources.

Article 50 acknowledges that no deal may occur. That requires no approval at all from any member.

But any country with even basic levels of integrity would it introduce a series of red lines that is likely to lead to an international peace treaty to which they are party being broken. The only reason there was a possibility of maintaining the GFA was because the EU made the major concession of allowing the backstop.