Will we start guessing what the new party names will be for:
Jeremy Corbyn style Marxist Labour
Tony Blair style New Labour.
ERG style Tories
The Rest of the Tories.
Will we start guessing what the new party names will be for:
Jeremy Corbyn style Marxist Labour
Tony Blair style New Labour.
ERG style Tories
The Rest of the Tories.
A physicist would say "entropy" as a collective name for them.Originally Posted by DrPatrickBarry
Mays red lines were the minimum that define Brexit. So they are not in that sense an interpretation. They are the only way to be free.
Red line 1 - No Customs Union because common external tarriffs, and collective terms negotiated by brussels overseen by ECJ defy the very essence of brexit. The EU can veto any deals we want to do ourselves.
Red line 2 - No single market because of the inability to limit free movement
Red line 3 - That Northern Ireland is part of the union and must be treated the same. There can be no customs border between us and NI. The last is deliberately violated by the EU
May cannot relax the red lines without keeping shackles from Brussels which is exactly what brussels want, and also prevents brexit in any real sense, leaving us as a vassal state to quote Boris. That is what brussels has always wanted: to make us impotent, whilst giving access to our markets and money.
David Davis would have done a far better job. He rightly refused to go along with the "Negotiating Order" partly because it is a clear violation by the EU of article 50 in respect of "future arrangement", but also it is a nonsense speaking of money and borders without first talking trade. Davis was overruled and clearly angry about it. Our PM and parliament are stupid. Whatever they want, you do not get it playing the EU game.
In any event the problem will now ratchet up. Eu will abuse the refusal of UK to go with no deal to impose unnacceptable conditions on a long extension. What choice does May then Have? Yvette Cooper and Parliament with help of consitutional violation by the speaker have capitulated, so we are now at the mercy of Brussels. Blame Cooper for that. I hope she will pay the 39billion. Because I will not.
ERG were stupid in playing their trump card too soon. A tory confidence vote on the PM in the last month on May would have ousted her. They have now given May one year tenure to enact the final humiliation by brussels. ERG are probably contemplating calling the vote of confidence in the government itself to prevent May selling us down the river for eternity. What happens then is anybodies guess.
Last edited by Oracle; 08-04-2019 at 11:30 AM.
Its a bit like Groundhog day this, isnt it?? Same old issues to chew on with an occasional side shoot into something someone knows about like the education sector. I agree with a point earlier that the threat of a broken democratic process is greater than any short term economic issues.
Hubris is such a damaging characteristic which we can all be guilty of. But the hubris of rampant EU expansion is the most damaging of all and I think we should be proud of the fact that UK called the EU out on it. No matter what bit of it rankled with you....and there are too many cliched stereotypes thrown out by remainers, there were all symptoms of something that people felt but maybe could not articulate too clearly...the EU experiment had overstepped its mark, its purpose and its sense of restraint. Maastrict was the watershed and the poison has festered ever since. A bursting abscess is never a pretty sight....but the patient feels better afterwards!
All the hints from Government ministers this morning seem to indicate that the Government will indeed agree with Labour's proposal for a permanent customs union. A few people on here have explained why this is such a bad idea but it is worth remembering that some Labour people used to think that too. Here is an article written by Barry Gardiner for the Guardian in July 2017.
https://www.theguardian.com/commenti...britain-europe
Some have suggested we should retain membership of the customs union, the benefits of which extend to goods rather than services, and establish common import tariffs with respect to the rest of the world. But that is not possible. The only members of this union are the member states of the EU, and they alone have negotiating power.
Other countries such as Turkey have a separate customs union agreement with the EU. If we were to have a similar agreement, several things would follow: the EU’s 27 members would set the common tariffs and Britain would have no say in how they were set. We would be unable to enter into any separate bilateral free trade agreement. We would be obliged to align our regulatory regime with the EU in all areas covered by the union, without any say in the rules we had to adopt. And we would be bound by the case law of the ECJ, even though we would have no power to bring a case to the court.
As a transitional phase, a customs union agreement might be thought to have some merit. However, as an end point it is deeply unattractive. It would preclude us from making our own independent trade agreements with our five largest export markets outside the EU (the US, China, Japan, Australia and the Gulf states).
More important, were, say, the EU to negotiate an agreement with the US that was in the union’s best interests but against our own, our markets would be obliged to accept American produce with no guarantee of reciprocal access for our own goods into the US.
Turkey faces precisely such an asymmetry with Mexico, with which the EU negotiated an agreement 20 years ago. Turkey still faces a 20% tariff on its clothing goods exported to Mexico, while it imports Mexican cars on a tariff-free basis.
Absolutely spot on Barry. Why aren't you still saying this now?
The problem is Wheeze, they no longer propose to drain the poison. They are hoping to put a sticking plaster over it in the hope nobody notices that nothing has changed, other than permanent revocation of britains power to decide whether to lance it in future or not. The sticking plaster will cost 39 billion, and thats before they add the "extended delay" extortion.
What amazes me is how politicians can blithely talk about the maintaining a customs union when the conditions are ridiculous. What sentient country or government would or could possibly agree to be bound to an economic instrument over which they have no control? Its palpable madness. It betrays both leave and remain camps in one simple act of self immolation!
Leave really does have to mean leave. And if the government cannot stomach that then the only realistic alternative is to revoke article 50.....except they are too chicken!
Spot on. I actually asked my MP whether they would dare to go to a car dealer in private life and state "I will leave with a car today, no deal is not an option", and I asked whether the MP thought the price would increase or reduce as a result? I ventured that there was a basic lack of life experience in removing the option of walking away.
I suggested the only deal that would be offered is the promise of talks about a car with no specification and a bill in advance for 39 billion and whether that outcome was familiar?
I also stated that the only alternative to no deal brexit for an EU that refuses to negotiate, is a withdrawal of article 50 before we lose the veto, and that if MPs were going to defy brexit, at least have the guts to do it properly.
I was told I was being intemperate and that I would be blocked!
Last edited by Oracle; 08-04-2019 at 04:13 PM.
"No deal" buying a car - you are in the same position as you were before you entered the showroom - in contrast no deal Brexit is totally different from before you entered negotiations. The equivalent of walking out of the showroom without a deal is Remain.
No analogy is perfect, but neither is yours of maintaining status quo. We have stated we will leave (not that it has got through to most MPs so far) so whatever the status quo must change.
But this aspect is undeniable: In every negotiation being able to show you can walk away is the only way to ensure an equitable deal. If you say you will not or cannot walk away, the other side can and will dictate adverse terms.
Remainers have hopelessly undermined the chances of an equitable deal. Indeed the ver talk of customs union shows most in the house have no grasp of the issues, if they think it is any form of Brexit.
Even leading German voices are appalled at barniers behaviour and rightly so.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote