Categories
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Losing the peace
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Losing the peace
The whiff of panic is palpable among what passes for the Leave intelligentsia. Two years ago they were airily asserting that the EU needed a deal more than Britain did and that it could be done over a long lunch, with the EU paying for the post-prandial cigars.
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
The full report, of which there were more details in the Guardian, did seem to have some workable ideas. IHT taxed on the recipient rather than the deceased estate has always struck me as a fairer system.
The £10K for mid-twenty year olds seems bonkers to me. 40% or more of them will have 10Ks of student debt, which the state has imposed. Why then give them £10K? What's the logic of these two positions?
that was TSEs New Thread header
But if this is the right strategy for the EU, it is not being followed. Instead, at present, the EU negotiators appear to be prioritising nailing Britain to the floor in the short and medium term, seeking to get both small and large advantages out of the ineptness of the Leave chorus line and the paralysis of the British government. This is no doubt extremely satisfying for them, especially after the many examples of generalised hostility and gratuitous rudeness from Leave campaigners at every level. This is not good news for Britain. I suggest that it is not good news for the EU either.
The EU's negotiating approach exemplifies why we are so right to be leaving. They just want to look like the tough guys in order to intimidate and other Sovereign Nation State (!) who might dare to consider following us out of the door. Having a win-win deal with the UK doesn't even feature in their thinking.
Surprisingly negative on the EU from someone the swivel-eyed brigade paint as an extreme Remainiac... but has the ring of truth about it. The EU hold all the cards; it's human nature to push that advantage to the limit.
Euroscepticism is higher in countries that do better than the EU average in terms of economic performance and quality of government, and among those that think their country is doing better than much of the EU. Why is that? It is to a large part due to the fact that they attribute the good economic and political performance to the quality of their national government, not to the EU. Because their country is doing relatively well, or at least they perceive it as such, they think a viable exit option to membership exists.....
.....This suggests that better performance is not going to be the silver bullet to combat Euroscepticism. Pro-European elites in Brussels and beyond need to live with Eurosceptics.
http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/brexit/2018/05/09/euroscepticism-is-here-to-stay/
the official unit of time is "leaders of UKIP"
The EU negotiating team encouraged by Varadkar is treating the island of Ireland as a more important construct than the United Kingdom.
Yes, they’d rather have a europhile as British PM but, absent that, they’d rather have her than Jeremy Corbyn or Jacob Rees-Mogg.
Therefore I don’t expect them to push her too far. They know they deal needs to clear Parliament.
Oh Jeremy Corbyn isn’t like other politicians.
Downside for that is they can't do in John Woodcock if this thesis were to hold...
As I said a while ago, the bitterness is going to become entrenched, probably for decades.
Barnier had two objectives. One, get the money, to which he was not obviously entitled. Two, tie in the UK to EU regulation come hell or high water.
The second objective is nothing to do with whether this is good or bad for the EU economy - I doubt that Barnier has given this the slightest thought. The real consequence of Brexit that Barnier wants to avoid is the UK diverging from EU regulation and succeeding. This is the ultimate disaster for Brussels as it would cause the EU to collapse. Once nations realised that the benefits of the club are massively overestimated, the desire for national sovereignty would prevail.
Barnier was, at one stage, prepared to go about his business by threatening a poor FTA outcome with a lot of 'friction' and hoping that this would pressure the UK into seeking a more integrated model where he could impose at least some measure of regulations. But now, and thanks to the UK Remainers, he has gone all-in (with someone else's money, of course) and is gambling everything on forcing the UK to either stay in the CU (and hence be stuck with full alignment) or at worst pretending to back down and agree to May's stupid customs partnership, which achieves exactly the same thing but less efficiently.
The danger is that Barnier has overplayed his hand and ends with nothing. Because, other than a complete backing down, how can the UK get an agreement done in time given all the time that has been wasted playing the NI/CU game? And if the Brexiteers really won't stand for the backdown and roll May, at this stage it is too late for any other deal to be agreed.
No deal beckons. And that is a disaster for Barnier. No money, no control and a major nation on his doorstep that hates the EU with a passion. And then, what if the UK then still succeeds....?
JRM save us!
There is growing alarm in Westminster that Britain’s future defence and security co-operation treaty could suffer if the EU presses ahead with its approach to Galileo. It has prompted the Treasury to look into how it can change the licences of UK-based companies that specialise in satellite and encryption technology to halt the use of intellectual property overseas, The Times has learnt.
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/news/security-firms-face-ban-on-helping-eu-in-row-over-satellite-dhl2x8wsh
Thank you, Antifrank, as always for an excellent thread and a measured and interesting argument.
Even though you and I were on opposite sides of the vote on 23/6/16, my expectation was that the EU would comport itself with a measure of carrot and stick but it faced a dilemma. IF the A50 deal was too generous, not only would the UK not need to seek to re-join but it wouldn't have the effect of "ne pas encourager les autres" as far as other prospective exiting countries were concerned.
Too onerous a deal and the EU would have the problem you described - the UK would harbour such resentment rapprochement would be impossible and UK-EU relations would be irreparably damaged.
So how to craft an A50 deal which provides enough disincentive to prevent other EU members wanting to leave while a) maintaining a good relationship with the UK in the present and immediate future and b) leaving enough door open to tempt the UK back to full membership in the future ?
It's not easy and one is tempted to suggest that if you think May and the UK Government are having problems so are the EU. The mutual recognition of incompatible objectives would be a great start - there's a word in the dictionary called "compromise" and most agreements contain compromise by the bucket-load.
If we are going to define a bad A50 deal as "not getting everything we want" then no deal will look better than any deal because in order to get an agreement we are going to have to give ground in some areas. That can be sold if the ground given is in areas so technical and complex that no voter will either understand or be bothered (obviously not the colour of passports which is the only thing that matters) and that must be May and Davis's hope. However, Ulster and the UK-EU border are a bit more obvious so we have for internal political consumption to be uncompromising.
The EU doesn't have to worry about that in the same way but it also needs a deal that works. A sensible EU negotiator might recognise our problems in some areas and be accommodating while nailing us to the floor in less obvious more technical issues.
edit: if anyone has the story it would be greatly appreciated
Meanwhile millions of Tykes take to the streets to watch some blokes in lycra go wizzing past.
I wish the whole referendum thing had never happened but the EU doing Farage's work for him with schoolboy mocking of all and every UK suggestion and exhibiting a proud lack of interest in making any suggestions of their own - the whole 'it's entirely down to the UK' argument may be true but really really stupid strategically - leaves me, as an EU resident Brit, fuming at the indecision of May's government and the perfidious behaviour of the EU.
In my darkest moments I admit to feeling a sense of 'sod it - diamond hard brexit it is' - but then I won't be too badly hit as I live overseas so reason kicks back in and I hope for BINO - which is still my favoured outcome and will still probably be what happens. Any higher ideals of what the EU is and what it might be, that I have held for the last 40 years, are gone though.
One thing has always interested me - this idea that if the EU were perceived to be too generous to the UK it would encourage others to demand the same. I wonder how far this is true. Other countries don't seem to have the same issues as the UK has had with free movement, not least because they don't see it as immigration in the way that many in the UK do and because of geographical issues and different welfare systems. They also have a different view of the nation state for historical reasons. So would there really be this push from others to get a similar Britain-lite deal?
On Northern Ireland the problem is that there just aren't enough logical possibilities to have the luxury of discarding unpleasant ones. The British want a circle, but they want it to have four corners. Since this isn't a thing, you need to talk about other options, like a rectangle with rounded corners, and see if any of them can satisfy both sides of the negotiation that the British are having with themselves.
Then the Netherlands, Italy and Sweden.
Very soon they have to shut up shop and return to a Common Market. Then we can all rejoin.
make sure that the EU’s rules retain coherence (so Britain must not be given special favours, even if they are in the short term economic interest of the EU, because they would destroy the EU’s long term stability).
The Irish border is sui generis and, I believe, more objectively questionable. Ultimately the UK can have a hard border if it wants one, although we probably don't actually want one. It's a huge mess.
if they had patience they would be more likely to get there.
And I would be very surprised if two of the founder members would do anything either.
This too.
1. Would giving Britain special favours over some things really destroy the EU's long-term stability? Why and how would this happen?
2. How would Britain continue to be a thorn in the EU's flesh and how would this manifest itself?
Of course, not sure how it works when every member of the Cabinet that voted Leave will vote against her Customs Partnership. Not sure then how you manage to claim that you have delivered the result of the referendum when everyone who supported the winning side tells you that you are wrong.
Then she can make Olly Robbins a Lord and he can join the rest of the undemocratic pigswill. Of course, May will have to join him as there is no way she can ever stand for election again after this type of sellout.
Despite the UK’s deep involvement in Galileo since the project’s start, future participation is at risk, leaving it looking at the possibility of establishing its own system.
https://sciencebusiness.net/news/excluding-uk-europes-galileo-system-would-be-gift-putin-says-mep
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-43546209
The Financial Times reports that in its letter to the UK government, the European Commission said security elements of the GPS project needed to be protected to avoid them being "irretrievably compromised" for several years by being shared with the UK, which will be a "third party" after Brexit.
Commission spokesman Alexander Winterstein said it was "the right time to start thinking about adjusting co-operation" on Galileo because the the UK becomes a "third country" - ie no longer a member of the EU - on 29 March, 2019…
The EU attitude on this is not defensible.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5708087/Oxford-University-plans-reinstate-Theresa-portrait.html
However, what the UK’s leaving does do is clearly leave Europe under German hegemony with France providing a bit of song and dance during intermissions.
The bogeyman conjured up by Brexiters will now come true...because of Brexit.
Things are so bad now that there aren't even any solutions to this mess that could even unite the various factions of Brexiters let alone unite the majority of the country. What a total mess.
However, looking at faults on the Remain side, I still think that David Cameron's attempts at renegotiation prior to the referendum are a big part of why we are where we are. He simply shouldn't have done it. The referendum should have been our membership as it was versus exit - rather than renegotiated membership versus exit. By seeking renegotiation Cameron sent out the message that maybe our membership wasn't all that wonderful... from that moment on the whole Remain campaign was undermined as Remainers were put on the back foot and lost the chance to campaign for what we really believe in and had to fall grudgingly in behind Cameron's diluted membership plan. Whether or not we would have won if things had been different I don't know but we'd certainly have been able to fight a more positive campaign. I didn't really believe in the kind of diluted Remain that I was forced to vote for but it was the only kind of Remain on offer...
Oh, and the word "Remain" itself is such a half hearted word anyway... It implies reluctance. Just a cursory online search for synonyms for "Remain" show how bad a choice it was.
However, it may persuade one or two waverers on the sub-committee. Williamson? May only needs one vote there.
Then, she can push it through cabinet and parliament and dare the Brexiters to blink.
This is a political not a legal process - rather than say " we have a problem because of the legal structure which the UK and the EU need to work through and we will be seeking ways to do that" the PR machine spurts out "the EU sees the UK as a third country and we can't trust them, (except of course with security and intelligence information, where it would be an outrageous breach of every European value if the UK didn't tell us everything all the time)".
it's infuriating
Ms Massey has worked as an adviser to the late Venezuelan dictator Hugo Chavez, who cited her in his speeches.
This is a District Donald Trump won 74-24 at the General.
JFK with tattoos is on the march.
But when asked whether the policies belonged to the Conservative or Labour party, three quickly replied in succession: “Conservative”.
When the men were told that the policies belonged to Mr Corbyn’s Labour party, not Theresa May’s Conservatives, they went cold, with one calling them “rubbish”.
“Their sums don’t add up,” said another participant, adding: “Although we haven’t seen the sums. We’re assuming they’re not going to add up.”
Another said the ideas could not be delivered “without ruining the country”
https://www.ft.com/content/f2632c6e-4e1d-11e8-a7a9-37318e776bab
The EU rolls over - "See. We had nothing to lose except our chains. We were right to leave." The EU holds the line - "See how the EU treats us. We were right to leave."
Wages still on the rise, one Brexit threat remainers actually met
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2018/05/08/dearth-skilled-workers-pushes-wage-growth/
Sounds a perfect Corbynista...its all the evil empire's fault for everything ever.
https://twitter.com/HughRBennett/status/994129475184025601
The Uk should have started negotiations from a WTO position and then sought concesions from the EU in return for offering lower tariffs for EU exports to the UK.
Maybe we will end up with WTO terms and start negotiations all over again but three years and a smooth transition will have been lost.
The money is small fry, and only a short term issue. The main EU objective is to have a coherent set of rules and regulations with as few exceptions as possible. It is why they would prefer either CU or SM, but we have refused that (at least officially) .
I don't see any desire to punish, but the EU is not under any obligation to make our freely chosen hair shirt any more comfortable.
Perhaps the MBE could be relaunched as The Commonwealth Medal.
This is in fact what May tried with her Lancaster House approach with the shock and awe tactic of saying we'd leave the single market and customs union.