Brexited | the worst threads live the longest

Do you think there will be a Deal or No Deal?

  • Total voters
    194
  • Poll closed .
FireballXL5 said:
As the huge shit gets ever closer to the huge fan...

Brexit: 'Significant gaps' in UK's border plans

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-54021421
Click to expand...

If lorry parks will only be needed until 2025 that means one of three things.
1. The UK will no longer trade at all with the EU by 2025.
2. The UK would have rejoined the Customs Union by 2025.
3. The UK government doesn't know what Brexit entails and are totally incompetent.

Please cast your votes.
 
sun_tzu said:
I still think there will be an extension - but packaged up in a way that the EU can say we backed down and asked to extend and the UK can say we are independent ... Im guessing something like an initial trading relationship - which is the same as now for a year or two as finer details of a long term trading relationship are ironed out (basically an extension)
We will accept the level playing field (but ignore it) and we will claim all our fishing waters (but allow our EU colleagues to fish there pretty much as we do now) and then in a year or two we have the same troubles again as we still wont have improved port infrastructure, trained people, or have agreement on a long term deal... rinse repeat for a decade or so and we rejoin
Click to expand...

Don't think there's any chance of this. For a start whether there is any kind of trade deal or not, the UK leaves the Customs Union at the end of this year and thus all the Customs related problems have to be resolved by the end of this year.
 
FT: UK plan to undermine withdrawal treaty threatens Brexit trade talks

The UK is planning new legislation that will override key parts of the Brexit withdrawal agreement, risking the collapse of trade negotiations with Brussels. Sections of the internal market bill — due to be published this Wednesday — are expected to “eliminate the legal force of parts of the withdrawal agreement” in areas including state aid and Northern Ireland customs, according to three people familiar with the plans. The move would “clearly and consciously” undermine the agreement on Northern Ireland that Boris Johnson signed last October to avoid a return to a hard border in the region, one person with knowledge of the plans said.
Click to expand...

See full article at link above.
 
This Government is an absolute shambles. Can you imagine the mess we will be in with no deal. They negotiate a deal with NI and now go back on it and they expect to be trusted with other deals. :wenger:
 
Not been here in a while. You just knew we would renege on the agreement. We are a hopeless country.
 
Last edited:
sun_tzu said:
I still think there will be an extension - but packaged up in a way that the EU can say we backed down and asked to extend and the UK can say we are independent ... Im guessing something like an initial trading relationship - which is the same as now for a year or two as finer details of a long term trading relationship are ironed out (basically an extension)
We will accept the level playing field (but ignore it) and we will claim all our fishing waters (but allow our EU colleagues to fish there pretty much as we do now) and then in a year or two we have the same troubles again as we still wont have improved port infrastructure, trained people, or have agreement on a long term deal... rinse repeat for a decade or so and we rejoin
Click to expand...

why on earth would the EU accept to that? Its evident that the UK isn't interested in a UK-EU deal. Stalling the inevitable will only contribute in the UK getting more time to prepare itself thus strengthening the hand of a competitor.
 
I hope the EU stops bothering, call Boris' bluff, and he can deal with whatever comes from that. I was really sad when the UK voted to leave, don't think I can see Westminster leave soon enough at this point.
 
Massive Spanner said:
https://www.rte.ie/news/brexit/2020/0907/1163607-brexit-landbridge-protocol-transition/

They're trying to basically bully Ireland now too. But sure.. what's new.
Click to expand...
Yeah, it’s pretty obvious that in a messy no-deal scenario where UK trucks are backing up at Dover, the UK would effectively push Irish trucks to the back of the queue.

The importance of the ‘land bridge’ across UK territory to Irish exports is one of the few genuine bits of leverage the UK has.
 
Why does Johnson keep referring to an Australian type deal. More b*ll*cks to feed the dumbo Brexiters.
(For info Australia and EU are just entering the 8th round of talks on a FTA , which of course the UK will no longer be a part of.)

Hope no Brits are planning a holiday outside the UK over NewYear, if Boris renege's on the WA the UK's borders will be closed - but not by the UK- take back control!
 
TheGame said:
This Government is an absolute shambles. Can you imagine the mess we will be in with no deal. They negotiate a deal with NI and now go back on it and they expect to be trusted with other deals. :wenger:
Click to expand...

Could not have put it better myself.
Honesty. How on earth can Boris believe that leaving with no deal can be a good outcome. He and his party must seriously believe that the EU negotiators are total amateurs and have not already understood the rediculous game that the UK are playing.

It is a typically bullying mentality and fools no one.
 
We all knew this was coming, I'd rather they just announce no deal at this point to let everyone attempt to prepare for the fallout.
 
sun_tzu said:
I still think there will be an extension - but packaged up in a way that the EU can say we backed down and asked to extend and the UK can say we are independent ... Im guessing something like an initial trading relationship - which is the same as now for a year or two as finer details of a long term trading relationship are ironed out (basically an extension)
We will accept the level playing field (but ignore it) and we will claim all our fishing waters (but allow our EU colleagues to fish there pretty much as we do now) and then in a year or two we have the same troubles again as we still wont have improved port infrastructure, trained people, or have agreement on a long term deal... rinse repeat for a decade or so and we rejoin
Click to expand...
This post hasn't aged well. In only a few days. Time will tell, but its not looking as good as Guido told you it would be, is it?
 
I honestly thought that the Withdrawal Agreement would be respected, even if there was no trade deal, what with it being needed to maintain the Good Friday Agreement and being part of International Law. Silly me.
 
At the Downing Street lobby briefing the prime minister’s spokesman said that Boris Johnson had always made it clear that he did not want Northern Ireland exporter to have to fill in exit summary declarations, or tariffs to apply to goods moving from Britain to Northern Ireland, and that therefore the EU could not object to London interpreting the withdrawal agreement in this way. The spokesman said:

"The PM has always been publicly clear about what our interpretation of both the withdrawal agreement and the Northern Ireland protocol was. For example, he publicly set out that there would be no export summary declarations on goods moving from Northern Ireland to Great Britain, and he also ruled out tariffs on goods moving from GB to NI on several occasions. He set out those positions in advance of the EU signing the withdrawal agreement. They did so with full knowledge of the prime minister’s position."

Johnson made comments along these lines on various occasions, most famously when he spoke at a Northern Ireland drinks reception during the 2019 general election campaign. In this clip he said there would be no tariffs on goods going from Britain to Northern Ireland - although here he clarified that there would be an exemption for goods subsequently going to Ireland. On other occasions he implied there would be no tariffs period on any goods going from Britain to Northern Ireland.

At this Northern Ireland drinks reception Johnson also said that, if any exporter was told by an official to fill in an exit summary declaration for goods being sent to GB, they should tell that official to ring him up as prime minister and he would “direct them to throw that form in the bin”

But the point about these claims made by the PM before the withdrawal agreement was signed is that, when Johnson did say these things, it was widely reported that what he was saying was wrong because he was ignoring what the text of the agreement actually said. See, for example, this Belfast Telegraph story about his tariffs claim, or this Guardian story about his exit summary declarations claims.

No 10 now seems to be using comments that at the time were dismissed as gaffes as evidence of consistency in its policy making. This is unusual, to say the least. Normally, if the PM makes an error, you correct the error. Here it is more a case of No 10 correcting the policy.

https://www.theguardian.com/politic...ement-as-just-tidying-up-loose-ends-live-news
 
The report on this in my Dutch newspaper mentions that Brexit politicians don't care anymore for Scottish or NI feelings on any of this; they're doing whatever they think it takes to manouver the UK into a stronger position long-term for international trade deal agreements - at whatever cost. The implication seemed to be that the current UK government doesn't mind if this ultimately leads to NI and Scotland splitting off. Is that a good assessment of things? It seems particularly reckless and narrow-minded.
 
Cheimoon said:
The report on this in my Dutch newspaper mentions that Brexit politicians don't care anymore for Scottish or NI feelings on any of this; they're doing whatever they think it takes to manouver the UK into a stronger position long-term for international trade deal agreements - at whatever cost. The implication seemed to be that the current UK government doesn't mind if this ultimately leads to NI and Scotland splitting off. Is that a good assessment of things? It seems particularly reckless and narrow-minded.
Click to expand...

Yes it is - this is generally an English thing - the Scots and Northern Irish voted against it and nothing since the vote has done either Scotland or NI any favors - particularly NI who appear to be stuck in the middle of a mess they didn't want because people in England (Politicians I mean) with basically no clue about the day to day reality of the border in Ireland playing God
 
Last edited:
balaks said:
Yes it is - this is generally an English thing - the Scots and Northern Irish voted against it and nothing since the vote has done either Scotland or NI any favors - particularly NI who appear to be stuck in the middle of a mess they didn't want because people in England (Politicians I mean) with basically no clue about the day to day reality of the border in Ireland playing God
Click to expand...
Well, I know that part. But previously, keeping the UK together seemed pretty important. Or did they never really care about losing Scotland, and did they just pretend to care about NI because of Tories needed the DUP for their majority previously?

In the end, I'm wondering if the Tories are really, seriously putting the UK at risk (Brexit first!), or if this is all paper talk and either everybody knows Scotland and NI aren't going anywhere anyway or the Tories will relent before seriously risking secession.
 
Cheimoon said:
Well, I know that part. But previously, keeping the UK together seemed pretty important. Or did they never really care about losing Scotland, and did they just pretend to care about NI because of Tories needed the DUP for their majority previously?

In the end, I'm wondering if the Tories are really, seriously putting the UK at risk (Brexit first!), or if this is all paper talk and either everybody knows Scotland and NI aren't going anywhere anyway or the Tories will relent before seriously risking secession.
Click to expand...

I don't think they care at all to be honest. They certainly would be more than happy to see the back of NI. There is a very real possibility of Scotland getting another referendum in the next 2/3 years and who knows how they would vote now. If Scotland vote to leave the UK then Sinn Fein will be all over a border poll so it could be a domino effect.
 
The other advantage of just having a polity made up of England and Wales is that you are pretty much guaranteed an in-built Conservative majority. Labour (with a couple of exceptions) have needed Scottish seats for them to govern. Scottish independence would mean Labour would have to markedly change its electoral strategies.
 
Cheimoon said:
Well, I know that part. But previously, keeping the UK together seemed pretty important. Or did they never really care about losing Scotland, and did they just pretend to care about NI because of Tories needed the DUP for their majority previously?

In the end, I'm wondering if the Tories are really, seriously putting the UK at risk (Brexit first!), or if this is all paper talk and either everybody knows Scotland and NI aren't going anywhere anyway or the Tories will relent before seriously risking secession.
Click to expand...

The problem with this narrative is of course that Wales voted leave. So half the countries in the UK with circa 90% of the population of the UK voted majority leave. As did 35% of Scotland and 44% of Northern Ireland.

It has taken 4 years to get to this point in the process of leaving so it has not been rushed through really has it?

There are certain myths around brexit which just will not die no matter how many times you show they are not really true. This perception that only English people wanted Brexit is one of them and much loved by the pro EU crowd it is.

The majority of A B and C1 social classes also voted leave and yet the assumption that it is the poor who voted leave also continues unabated.
 
Don't Kill Bill said:
The problem with this narrative is of course that Wales voted leave. So half the countries in the UK with circa 90% of the population of the UK voted majority leave. As did 35% of Scotland and 44% of Northern Ireland.

It has taken 4 years to get to this point in the process of leaving so it has not been rushed through really has it?

There are certain myths around brexit which just will not die no matter how many times you show they are not really true. This perception that only English people wanted Brexit is one of them and much loved by the pro EU crowd it is.

The majority of A B and C1 social classes also voted leave and yet the assumption that it is the poor who voted leave also continues unabated.
Click to expand...

Retired English people living in Wales voted leave, otherwise Wales would have been majority remain

https://nation.cymru/news/wales-brexit-vote-caused-by-english-retirees-oxford-university/
 
Don't Kill Bill said:
I doubt retired English people can account for 52% of people living in Wales voting leave though unless they are very persuasive retired English people.
Click to expand...

I can see how with your fine grasp of numerical data you thought voting for brexit was a smart choice
 
Don't Kill Bill said:
Except I didn't vote Brexit I voted remain. So where does that leave your grasp on anything, tenuous at best.
Click to expand...

That study isn’t suggesting that the entirety of the 52% of people in Wales who voted leave were all retired English people.
 
Don't Kill Bill said:
The problem with this narrative is of course that Wales voted leave. So half the countries in the UK with circa 90% of the population of the UK voted majority leave. As did 35% of Scotland and 44% of Northern Ireland.

It has taken 4 years to get to this point in the process of leaving so it has not been rushed through really has it?

There are certain myths around brexit which just will not die no matter how many times you show they are not really true. This perception that only English people wanted Brexit is one of them and much loved by the pro EU crowd it is.

The majority of A B and C1 social classes also voted leave and yet the assumption that it is the poor who voted leave also continues unabated.
Click to expand...
I don't think any of that is particularly relevant to my question though. I'll elaborate a bit.

NI was a huge painpoint in the Brexit negotiations, to make sure it stayed properly within the UK, the Good Friday agreement could continue, etc. That's an important part of the reason why part 1 (Brexit) of the negotiations took forever. What we are discussing here, is that the UK government for the trade agreement negotiations (part 2) now apparently wants to renege on some of the stuff that was agreed upon in part 1, including the situation with NI. That was unthinkable previously, which one might have thought was because of a will to keep NI fully integrated in the UK; but given the apparent change of heart now regarding that clause in the Brexit agreement, it seems the previous concern with NI was due to the need for DUP support for the government, not because of an actual interest in the region - regardless of the percentage of people in NI that voted in favour of Brexit.

As for Scotland: a no-deal Brexit (or similar) goes against what a strong majority over there would like to see given the best scenario (again: regardless of who actually voted for it), and will fuel talk of secession.

You're right that the majority of the UK's population live in England + Wales, and I am not all disputing that the UK government can do what it wants and has the mandate for that. I am just asking how much they care about ensuring NI and Scotland stay happy and won't want to secede. The answer seems to be 'not much'.
Don't Kill Bill said:
I doubt retired English people can account for 52% of people living in Wales voting leave though unless they are very persuasive retired English people.
Click to expand...
Obviously, the idea is that, if you take these people out of Wales, the remaining population would have a remain majority. Not that ONLY these retirees voted leave.
 
Don't Kill Bill said:
The problem with this narrative is of course that Wales voted leave. So half the countries in the UK with circa 90% of the population of the UK voted majority leave. As did 35% of Scotland and 44% of Northern Ireland.

It has taken 4 years to get to this point in the process of leaving so it has not been rushed through really has it?

There are certain myths around brexit which just will not die no matter how many times you show they are not really true. This perception that only English people wanted Brexit is one of them and much loved by the pro EU crowd it is.
Click to expand...
65% of Scotland voting remain isn't really a myth though is it? It is a fact that if the celtic parts of the Union's vote carried the same weight as England's we'd be remaining.

Clearly, the population of England dwarfs that of the other nations, and that is democracy in action, but it is hardly a myth that Brexit had a more significant proportionate backing in England than in the other nations. You have cited the results yourself.

So, yes, it is a threat to the Union and a palpable one and that threat is considered by the UK to be less important than pursuing their Brexit objectives. This is no myth.
 
Fingeredmouse said:
65% of Scotland voting remain isn't really a myth though is it? It is a fact that if the celtic parts of the Union's vote carried the same weight as England's we'd be remaining.

Clearly, the population of England dwarfs that of the other nations, and that is democracy in action, but it is hardly a myth that Brexit had a more significant proportionate backing in England than in the other nations. You have cited the results yourself.

So, yes, it is a threat to the Union and a palpable one and that threat is considered by the UK to be less important than pursuing their Brexit objectives. This is no myth.
Click to expand...
The bolded bit was actually exactly my question. :) So do you agree this week's actions/statements concerning the trade deal they're currently negotiating indicate that the UK government is prioritizing the deal over the union even more, or is it just same-old?
 
Cheimoon said:
I don't think any of that is particularly relevant to my question though. I'll elaborate a bit.

NI was a huge painpoint in the Brexit negotiations, to make sure it stayed properly within the UK, the Good Friday agreement could continue, etc. That's an important part of the reason why part 1 (Brexit) of the negotiations took forever. What we are discussing here, is that the UK government for the trade agreement negotiations (part 2) now apparently wants to renege on some of the stuff that was agreed upon in part 1, including the situation with NI. That was unthinkable previously, which one might have thought was because of a will to keep NI fully integrated in the UK; but given the apparent change of heart now regarding that clause in the Brexit agreement, it seems the previous concern with NI was due to the need for DUP support for the government, not because of an actual interest in the region - regardless of the percentage of people in NI that voted in favour of Brexit.

As for Scotland: a no-deal Brexit (or similar) goes against what a strong majority over there would like to see given the best scenario (again: regardless of who actually voted for it), and will fuel talk of secession.

You're right that the majority of the UK's population live in England + Wales, and I am not all disputing that the UK government can do what it wants and has the mandate for that. I am just asking how much they care about ensuring NI and Scotland stay happy and won't want to secede. The answer seems to be 'not much'.

Obviously, the idea is that, if you take these people out of Wales, the remaining population would have a remain majority. Not that ONLY these retirees voted leave.
Click to expand...

I know what he is saying but again it is only to make the narrative fit that only English people voted Brexit which is untrue and quite unpopular to point out as you can see.

Significant numbers of people though a minority in those countries also voted to leave in Scotland and NI. These are not tiny fractions of those populations by any means. If voting leave is so unconscionable that only the (pick your own superlative ) English would do so then how come so many Scots and Welsh and N Irish also voted leave.
 
Don't Kill Bill said:
I know what he is saying but again it is only to make the narrative fit that only English people voted Brexit which is untrue and quite unpopular to point out as you can see.

Significant numbers of people though a minority in those countries also voted to leave in Scotland and NI. These are not tiny fractions of those populations by any means. If voting leave is so unconscionable that only the (pick your own superlative ) English would do so then how come so many Scots and Welsh and N Irish also voted leave.
Click to expand...
I'm not sure what your point is here? Clearly people voted both ways in each country. No-one is saying otherwise. In a binary referendum it'd be fairly surprising if that were not the case. However, the population density of England naturally decides UK voting patterns (see also current Tory Govt).

It is the case that significant majorities, especially in Scotland, voted to remain in the two countries at most risk of leaving the Union as a consequence of Brexit. This is true.

Brexit was much more popular in England and Wales than in Scotland and NI. This is also true.

Pursuing the current Brexit policy puts significant strain on the Union and that is known and deemed acceptable. This is true.

I'm not sure why you see this as the creation of a narrative.
 
Just watched Tory government cabinet member Andrew Bridgin on Channel 4 News giving his views on the negotiations between the EU and UK.
Unbelievably arrogant:
The EU has much more to loose than the UK if a deal cannot be agreed.
The EU will have to give the UK the deal it wants because the member states will force the negotiators to agree.
And because of the strict handling of the negotiations, Barnier will be sidelined.

Isn't life simple when you have no understanding of reality...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.