Barnier today has effectively said that progress is stalled unless the UK redraws its red lines (Guardian live blog - "He says, if the UK were to adjust their red lines, the EU would adjust their offer").
Rowing back on the red lines is the one thing that might make Johnson and Davis finally resign.
Interesting times.
The EU is bluffing. If they let us crash out without a deal then there's the hardest of hard borders across Ireland.
If they let us crash out without a deal, the UK would break up within months.
I wonder if anyone would offer odds on the next UK Government being a Government of National Unity.
The likelihood of this all going spectacularly tits-up, and the parties rupturing to shed their more extreme fringes (which, in the case of Labour, includes the leadership), seems greater every day.
£10 on Cable being the next PM may not be as outlandish as it sounds.
"It is now that I am expecting those surviving UKIP supporters to declare “Now come on, all parties have problems fielding candidates in the year after a general!”"
Are there any UKIP supporters left on here? I thought the whole point was that UKIP having served its purpose is now pointless (unless the Government really is dumb enough to listen to the Remoaners and scrap Brexit).
Cancelling Brexit would be political suicide for the Conservatives, Corbyn would get a big majority.
Economic meltdown no-deal Brexit would be political suicide for the Conservatives, Corbyn [etc]
Parties have no inherent right to exist and I would not be sorry to see the Tory party collapse.
It wouldn't change the fact that there would still be something around at least 50% of the country wanting to vote for right or centre right candidates. The collapse of the Tory party would be no more of a victory for the Left than the Collapse of Labour would be for the Right.
What we lack in this country now is an economically Right wing, small state but very socially liberal party.
May I point you to the UK Libertarian Party who are also standing in next week's Lewisham East by election
Barnier today has effectively said that progress is stalled unless the UK redraws its red lines (Guardian live blog - "He says, if the UK were to adjust their red lines, the EU would adjust their offer").
Rowing back on the red lines is the one thing that might make Johnson and Davis finally resign.
Interesting times.
The EU is bluffing. If they let us crash out without a deal then there's the hardest of hard borders across Ireland.
If they let us crash out without a deal, the UK would break up within months.
Barnier today has effectively said that progress is stalled unless the UK redraws its red lines (Guardian live blog - "He says, if the UK were to adjust their red lines, the EU would adjust their offer").
Rowing back on the red lines is the one thing that might make Johnson and Davis finally resign.
Interesting times.
The EU is bluffing. If they let us crash out without a deal then there's the hardest of hard borders across Ireland.
Maybe they are, but we've heard many times over the last two years that the EU are bluffing over something or other and every single time May capitulates.
"It is now that I am expecting those surviving UKIP supporters to declare “Now come on, all parties have problems fielding candidates in the year after a general!”"
Are there any UKIP supporters left on here? I thought the whole point was that UKIP having served its purpose is now pointless (unless the Government really is dumb enough to listen to the Remoaners and scrap Brexit).
Cancelling Brexit would be political suicide for the Conservatives, Corbyn would get a big majority.
Economic meltdown no-deal Brexit would be political suicide for the Conservatives, Corbyn [etc]
Parties have no inherent right to exist and I would not be sorry to see the Tory party collapse.
It wouldn't change the fact that there would still be something around at least 50% of the country wanting to vote for right or centre right candidates. The collapse of the Tory party would be no more of a victory for the Left than the Collapse of Labour would be for the Right.
What we lack in this country now is an economically Right wing, small state but very socially liberal party.
May I point you to the UK Libertarian Party who are also standing in next week's Lewisham East by election
Barnier today has effectively said that progress is stalled unless the UK redraws its red lines (Guardian live blog - "He says, if the UK were to adjust their red lines, the EU would adjust their offer").
Rowing back on the red lines is the one thing that might make Johnson and Davis finally resign.
Interesting times.
The EU is bluffing. If they let us crash out without a deal then there's the hardest of hard borders across Ireland.
If they let us crash out without a deal, the UK would break up within months.
I think that is unlikely.
Do you think a 'no deal' Brexit would lead to a swing away from support for a united Ireland? Why? Are all the people recoiling from the impotent rage of the Brexiteers suddenly going to feel the lure of British nationalism?
I wonder if anyone would offer odds on the next UK Government being a Government of National Unity.
The likelihood of this all going spectacularly tits-up, and the parties rupturing to shed their more extreme fringes (which, in the case of Labour, includes the leadership), seems greater every day.
£10 on Cable being the next PM may not be as outlandish as it sounds.
It won't happen but if you're determined to bet on it at least please take the 450.0 odds currently up on Betfair:
Barnier today has effectively said that progress is stalled unless the UK redraws its red lines (Guardian live blog - "He says, if the UK were to adjust their red lines, the EU would adjust their offer").
Rowing back on the red lines is the one thing that might make Johnson and Davis finally resign.
Interesting times.
The EU is bluffing. If they let us crash out without a deal then there's the hardest of hard borders across Ireland.
If they let us crash out without a deal, the UK would break up within months.
I think that is unlikely.
Do you think a 'no deal' Brexit would lead to a swing away from support for a united Ireland? Why? Are all the people recoiling from the impotent rage of the Brexiteers suddenly going to feel the lure of British nationalism?
The consequences of breaking away from the UK in the event of a No Deal Brexit are a good deal more severe than the consequences of remaining.
Barnier today has effectively said that progress is stalled unless the UK redraws its red lines (Guardian live blog - "He says, if the UK were to adjust their red lines, the EU would adjust their offer").
Rowing back on the red lines is the one thing that might make Johnson and Davis finally resign.
Interesting times.
The EU is bluffing. If they let us crash out without a deal then there's the hardest of hard borders across Ireland.
Maybe they are, but we've heard many times over the last two years that the EU are bluffing over something or other and every single time May capitulates.
Bluffing works when the other party is weak and desperate.
Barnier today has effectively said that progress is stalled unless the UK redraws its red lines (Guardian live blog - "He says, if the UK were to adjust their red lines, the EU would adjust their offer").
Rowing back on the red lines is the one thing that might make Johnson and Davis finally resign.
Interesting times.
The EU is bluffing. If they let us crash out without a deal then there's the hardest of hard borders across Ireland.
If they let us crash out without a deal, the UK would break up within months.
I think that is unlikely.
Do you think a 'no deal' Brexit would lead to a swing away from support for a united Ireland? Why? Are all the people recoiling from the impotent rage of the Brexiteers suddenly going to feel the lure of British nationalism?
The consequences of breaking away from the UK in the event of a No Deal Brexit are a good deal more severe than the consequences of remaining.
You're assuming that a 'No Deal' situation is sustainable for whatever rump is left over.
In case anyone is wondering if the substance of Barnier's speech doesn't match the headline, here:
“On regulatory alignment we have been pragmatic and developed the least disruptive system for citizens and businesses on both sides. Let’s go to pragmatism. Checks carried out on ferries are less disruptive than along a 500km land border.”
Is there a source for that quote? Just Googled it and Google isn't coming up with that quote which is odd.
"On customs, Northern Ireland would form part of our customs territory. What is feasible with a territory the size of Northern Ireland is not necessarily feasible with the whole UK. "
A bit of negotiation wriggle room there.
EDIT: Leave out Scotland? Big area but not much economic value.
Why does the size of the territory matter? It sounds like a totally arbitrary distinction.
And "a part of our customs territory"? They literally want to annex it, don't they?
Trying to impose an internal border between Northern Ireland and the rest of the UK would surely conflict with the GFA.
In any case, I would have thought that a back-stop that keeps the whole of the UK in the Customs Union would be very much to the advantage of the Irish Republic. East-West trade is far more extensive than North-South trade.
I've looked through the GFA a few times and don't see anything that would preclude customs checks (on the border, or elsewhere).
In case anyone is wondering if the substance of Barnier's speech doesn't match the headline, here:
“On regulatory alignment we have been pragmatic and developed the least disruptive system for citizens and businesses on both sides. Let’s go to pragmatism. Checks carried out on ferries are less disruptive than along a 500km land border.”
"On customs, Northern Ireland would form part of our customs territory. What is feasible with a territory the size of Northern Ireland is not necessarily feasible with the whole UK. "
A bit of negotiation wriggle room there.
EDIT: Leave out Scotland? Big area but not much economic value.
Why does the size of the territory matter? It sounds like a totally arbitrary distinction.
And "a part of our customs territory"? They literally want to annex it, don't they?
Trying to impose an internal border between Northern Ireland and the rest of the UK would surely conflict with the GFA.
In any case, I would have thought that a back-stop that keeps the whole of the UK in the Customs Union would be very much to the advantage of the Irish Republic. East-West trade is far more extensive than North-South trade.
Yes I think Barnier will accept extension to whole of UK - and clarification that end 2021 is simply an aspiration. Next step is regulatory alignment for the whole of the UK. That might be more difficult for both May and Barnier for different reasons. For May because of her Brexiteers. For Barnier because the UK would be getting the benefits of the single market without FOM. He might propose extending the transition period indefinitely as the back-stop which does include FOM.
Your last sentence seems the only viable option. The UK strategy seems to be to take the NI backstop which includes the concession of 3 freedoms without FOM, try and minimise the regulatory alignment elements and then apply it across the UK. The EU is pointing out that the backstop state is already a form of concessionary access to the EU not available to third countries and declining to apply it more widely. Barnier is squashing any idea of a “stage 2” transition which offers cherry-picked benefits to the UK’s liking, and perhaps the next step is to say “if you want a longer transition, then let’s just talk about that rather than this 2-stage process”.
"It is now that I am expecting those surviving UKIP supporters to declare “Now come on, all parties have problems fielding candidates in the year after a general!”"
Are there any UKIP supporters left on here? I thought the whole point was that UKIP having served its purpose is now pointless (unless the Government really is dumb enough to listen to the Remoaners and scrap Brexit).
Cancelling Brexit would be political suicide for the Conservatives, Corbyn would get a big majority.
Economic meltdown no-deal Brexit would be political suicide for the Conservatives, Corbyn [etc]
Parties have no inherent right to exist and I would not be sorry to see the Tory party collapse.
It wouldn't change the fact that there would still be something around at least 50% of the country wanting to vote for right or centre right candidates. The collapse of the Tory party would be no more of a victory for the Left than the Collapse of Labour would be for the Right.
What we lack in this country now is an economically Right wing, small state but very socially liberal party.
May I point you to the UK Libertarian Party who are also standing in next week's Lewisham East by election
I wonder if anyone would offer odds on the next UK Government being a Government of National Unity.
The likelihood of this all going spectacularly tits-up, and the parties rupturing to shed their more extreme fringes (which, in the case of Labour, includes the leadership), seems greater every day.
£10 on Cable being the next PM may not be as outlandish as it sounds.
I have £10 on him at 250/1 for that reason. Won't happen but a value bet. Occasionally they come off.
Is Barnier not pushing this NI only backstop agenda now because of the vote in the commons on Tuesday, to ensure customs union defeat for the government in the absence of any other possible agreement so more MPs likely to rebel?
"It is now that I am expecting those surviving UKIP supporters to declare “Now come on, all parties have problems fielding candidates in the year after a general!”"
Are there any UKIP supporters left on here? I thought the whole point was that UKIP having served its purpose is now pointless (unless the Government really is dumb enough to listen to the Remoaners and scrap Brexit).
Cancelling Brexit would be political suicide for the Conservatives, Corbyn would get a big majority.
Economic meltdown no-deal Brexit would be political suicide for the Conservatives, Corbyn [etc]
Parties have no inherent right to exist and I would not be sorry to see the Tory party collapse.
It wouldn't change the fact that there would still be something around at least 50% of the country wanting to vote for right or centre right candidates. The collapse of the Tory party would be no more of a victory for the Left than the Collapse of Labour would be for the Right.
What we lack in this country now is an economically Right wing, small state but very socially liberal party.
May I point you to the UK Libertarian Party who are also standing in next week's Lewisham East by election
The problem is that while libertarianism punches above its weight intellectually, it has very little mass appeal.
Doesn't it? Cameron was libertarian. Blair pretended to be for a while.
Cameron was no believer in the minimal State. There is no appetite for reducing the welfare state to a bare minimum, or moving health and education into the private sector.
Your last sentence seems the only viable option. The UK strategy seems to be to take the NI backstop which includes the concession of 3 freedoms without FOM, try and minimise the regulatory alignment elements and then apply it across the UK. The EU is pointing out that the backstop state is already a form of concessionary access to the EU not available to third countries and declining to apply it more widely. Barnier is squashing any idea of a “stage 2” transition which offers cherry-picked benefits to the UK’s liking, and perhaps the next step is to say “if you want a longer transition, then let’s just talk about that rather than this 2-stage process”.
Alternatively have no backstop past the transition.
There's no backstop in Article 50 today. Why should any backstop last one day longer than the transition?
By the end of the transition then we either need a new system or a new transition.
"It is now that I am expecting those surviving UKIP supporters to declare “Now come on, all parties have problems fielding candidates in the year after a general!”"
Are there any UKIP supporters left on here? I thought the whole point was that UKIP having served its purpose is now pointless (unless the Government really is dumb enough to listen to the Remoaners and scrap Brexit).
Cancelling Brexit would be political suicide for the Conservatives, Corbyn would get a big majority.
Economic meltdown no-deal Brexit would be political suicide for the Conservatives, Corbyn [etc]
Parties have no inherent right to exist and I would not be sorry to see the Tory party collapse.
It wouldn't change the fact that there would still be something around at least 50% of the country wanting to vote for right or centre right candidates. The collapse of the Tory party would be no more of a victory for the Left than the Collapse of Labour would be for the Right.
What we lack in this country now is an economically Right wing, small state but very socially liberal party.
May I point you to the UK Libertarian Party who are also standing in next week's Lewisham East by election
The problem is that while libertarianism punches above its weight intellectually, it has very little mass appeal.
Indeed, the biggest libertarian demographic is rich single white males living in London with no family ties and little need of public services and there are not enough of those to get much beyond 10%
"It is now that I am expecting those surviving UKIP supporters to declare “Now come on, all parties have problems fielding candidates in the year after a general!”"
Are there any UKIP supporters left on here? I thought the whole point was that UKIP having served its purpose is now pointless (unless the Government really is dumb enough to listen to the Remoaners and scrap Brexit).
Cancelling Brexit would be political suicide for the Conservatives, Corbyn would get a big majority.
Economic meltdown no-deal Brexit would be political suicide for the Conservatives, Corbyn [etc]
Parties have no inherent right to exist and I would not be sorry to see the Tory party collapse.
It wouldn't change the fact that there would still be something around at least 50% of the country wanting to vote for right or centre right candidates. The collapse of the Tory party would be no more of a victory for the Left than the Collapse of Labour would be for the Right.
What we lack in this country now is an economically Right wing, small state but very socially liberal party.
May I point you to the UK Libertarian Party who are also standing in next week's Lewisham East by election
When the exit poll came out I immediately thought I was fucked as I'd bet on the Cons doing well in Scotland and assumed Lab would be picking up dozen or so seats in Scotland so I'd be totally wiped out.
Instead I found that utterly unlikely punts like Cons winning Ayr, Carrick and Cumnock came in (after I had advised people on here not to back it).
Pre-Edit: Ah, I see there was some financial irregularity stuff that went on in Ayr with the SNP candidate - that could well have been decisive
Careful - that's sailing close to the wind:
John Lamont, the Conservative MSP complained to the Commissioner for Ethical Standards in Public Life in Scotland, who informed him that investigation of MPs was not their responsibility. No complaint was ever made to the Westminster Parliamentary Commissioner for Standards which did have jurisdiction. Nevertheless, he and others ensured the local and national press and media were inundated with stories about the 'investigation' and 'scandal' and who naturally found every opportunity to repeat them verbatim for the next two years.
Corri Wilson was not then, nor has ever been, under investigation by either body, on any issue.
Your last sentence seems the only viable option. The UK strategy seems to be to take the NI backstop which includes the concession of 3 freedoms without FOM, try and minimise the regulatory alignment elements and then apply it across the UK. The EU is pointing out that the backstop state is already a form of concessionary access to the EU not available to third countries and declining to apply it more widely. Barnier is squashing any idea of a “stage 2” transition which offers cherry-picked benefits to the UK’s liking, and perhaps the next step is to say “if you want a longer transition, then let’s just talk about that rather than this 2-stage process”.
Alternatively have no backstop past the transition.
There's no backstop in Article 50 today. Why should any backstop last one day longer than the transition?
By the end of the transition then we either need a new system or a new transition.
True, putting forward a workable solution to the Irish border commitment that we agreed to in December which would be effective from 1 January 2021 means the backstop isn’t required. It’s just that if the Cabinet could agree on a workable solution I would expect them to have mentioned it by now.
Is Barnier not pushing this NI only backstop agenda now because of the vote in the commons on Tuesday, to ensure customs union defeat for the government in the absence of any other possible agreement so more MPs likely to rebel?
Though the regulatory alignment May agreed for the UK in December seemed fine with Barnier then
Barnier today has effectively said that progress is stalled unless the UK redraws its red lines (Guardian live blog - "He says, if the UK were to adjust their red lines, the EU would adjust their offer").
Rowing back on the red lines is the one thing that might make Johnson and Davis finally resign.
Interesting times.
The EU is bluffing. If they let us crash out without a deal then there's the hardest of hard borders across Ireland.
That’s entirely up to Ireland and the EU.
The UK can and will decide in that scenario to use electronic customs declarations and spot checks well away from the actual border.
I don’t see any evidence of Ireland or the EU preparing for anything that looks like a border either, so they’re undoubtedly also bluffing.
Is Barnier not pushing this NI only backstop agenda now because of the vote in the commons on Tuesday, to ensure customs union defeat for the government in the absence of any other possible agreement so more MPs likely to rebel?
I'm lost to be honest. And not the only one by looks of it:
Your last sentence seems the only viable option. The UK strategy seems to be to take the NI backstop which includes the concession of 3 freedoms without FOM, try and minimise the regulatory alignment elements and then apply it across the UK. The EU is pointing out that the backstop state is already a form of concessionary access to the EU not available to third countries and declining to apply it more widely. Barnier is squashing any idea of a “stage 2” transition which offers cherry-picked benefits to the UK’s liking, and perhaps the next step is to say “if you want a longer transition, then let’s just talk about that rather than this 2-stage process”.
Alternatively have no backstop past the transition.
There's no backstop in Article 50 today. Why should any backstop last one day longer than the transition?
By the end of the transition then we either need a new system or a new transition.
True, putting forward a workable solution to the Irish border commitment that we agreed to in December which would be effective from 1 January 2021 means the backstop isn’t required. It’s just that if the Cabinet could agree on a workable solution I would expect them to have mentioned it by now.
And the fact that the EU refuses to talk about the future treaty until the exit deal is signed.
I think we have reached the point in the negotiations where we should walk away. We have undermined that move by failing to take the necessary preparations but we should get on with these now as fast as we can. I have always wanted a deal with the EU and have been as pragmatic as any in accepting the terms of that deal but there has to be a limit and for me the limit is the structural integrity of the UK.
In the event that this proposal for a backstop is rejected May should recall our negotiators and tell the EU that we are reconsidering our position.
Of course I am looking to walk away with a view to getting back to the negotiating table for a more sensible discussion but I accept that that may happen after we have left.
Barnier today has effectively said that progress is stalled unless the UK redraws its red lines (Guardian live blog - "He says, if the UK were to adjust their red lines, the EU would adjust their offer").
Rowing back on the red lines is the one thing that might make Johnson and Davis finally resign.
Interesting times.
The EU is bluffing. If they let us crash out without a deal then there's the hardest of hard borders across Ireland.
If they let us crash out without a deal, the UK would break up within months.
I think that is unlikely.
Do you think a 'no deal' Brexit would lead to a swing away from support for a united Ireland? Why? Are all the people recoiling from the impotent rage of the Brexiteers suddenly going to feel the lure of British nationalism?
The consequences of breaking away from the UK in the event of a No Deal Brexit are a good deal more severe than the consequences of remaining.
'Quick lads, fire up the project fear machine one more time.'
Is Barnier not pushing this NI only backstop agenda now because of the vote in the commons on Tuesday, to ensure customs union defeat for the government in the absence of any other possible agreement so more MPs likely to rebel?
I'm lost to be honest. And not the only one by looks of it:
I think we have reached the point in the negotiations where we should walk away. We have undermined that move by failing to take the necessary preparations but we should get on with these now as fast as we can. I have always wanted a deal with the EU and have been as pragmatic as any in accepting the terms of that deal but there has to be a limit and for me the limit is the structural integrity of the UK.
In the event that this proposal for a backstop is rejected May should recall our negotiators and tell the EU that we are reconsidering our position.
Of course I am looking to walk away with a view to getting back to the negotiating table for a more sensible discussion but I accept that that may happen after we have left.
"It is now that I am expecting those surviving UKIP supporters to declare “Now come on, all parties have problems fielding candidates in the year after a general!”"
Are there any UKIP supporters left on here? I thought the whole point was that UKIP having served its purpose is now pointless (unless the Government really is dumb enough to listen to the Remoaners and scrap Brexit).
Cancelling Brexit would be political suicide for the Conservatives, Corbyn would get a big majority.
Economic meltdown no-deal Brexit would be political suicide for the Conservatives, Corbyn [etc]
Parties have no inherent right to exist and I would not be sorry to see the Tory party collapse.
It wouldn't change the fact that there would still be something around at least 50% of the country wanting to vote for right or centre right candidates. The collapse of the Tory party would be no more of a victory for the Left than the Collapse of Labour would be for the Right.
What we lack in this country now is an economically Right wing, small state but very socially liberal party.
May I point you to the UK Libertarian Party who are also standing in next week's Lewisham East by election
The problem is that while libertarianism punches above its weight intellectually, it has very little mass appeal.
Indeed, the biggest libertarian demographic is rich single white males living in London with no family ties and little need of public services and there are not enough of those to get much beyond 10%
Is Barnier not pushing this NI only backstop agenda now because of the vote in the commons on Tuesday, to ensure customs union defeat for the government in the absence of any other possible agreement so more MPs likely to rebel?
I'm lost to be honest. And not the only one by looks of it:
Barnier clearly is trying to row back on what he signed up to in December, not sure if legally he can?
Good point. Maybe May should have just repeated those words from the December agreement as the UK back-up proposal. Barnier could hardly object to that. It isn't even time limited.
EDIT David Davis's people could have consulted with their Irish opposite number as to the specific scope and regulations and included that in their proposal.
I suspect the foreign secretary will somehow get over this invasion of privacy, which is, after all, only his latest attempt to distance himself from a collapsing building of which he was one of the leading architects.
There is something mesmerically psychopathic about the way Boris talks about Brexit betrayal when he is the holder of a great office of state in the government that is – right now – delivering it. His laments recall one of those police TV appeals where the weeping boyfriend of a missing woman looks straight into the camera and pleads for any information as to her whereabouts. I shan’t insult your intelligence by stating who the cops eventually pick up for it.
Boris also revealed he was warming strongly to Donald Trump, who’d be great at negotiating Brexit because “he’d go in bloody hard”. There’s always a slight frisson among the self-styled alphas, isn’t there – the momentary whiff of the beach volleyball scene in Top Gun. Brexit just needs a Kenny Loggins soundtrack, and Trump could be its wingman anytime.
To what extent is the EU itself on the hook for Brexit? I'm just wondering whether Barnier is panicking. AIUI:
- EU are signatories to GFA to maintain open border, so are just as on the hook as UK. - If UK does walk away or GTO otherwise occurs, the EU are committed to maintain at least one open border with an MFN country. - What they do with one MFN country they will have to do for others.
So, much of the peril that applies to the UK in terms of post Brexit third country relationships, might also apply to the EU....
I may be talking utter rubbish, I'm no legal, but on the logic above, could the EU be as tied in knots by the Ireland conundrum as we are?
Barnier today has effectively said that progress is stalled unless the UK redraws its red lines (Guardian live blog - "He says, if the UK were to adjust their red lines, the EU would adjust their offer").
Rowing back on the red lines is the one thing that might make Johnson and Davis finally resign.
Interesting times.
The EU is bluffing. If they let us crash out without a deal then there's the hardest of hard borders across Ireland.
There is.
They are betting, correctly or incorrectly, that the UK would prefer that not to happen.
Which is why we need to be preparing for it, otherwise our credibility is zero.
Walking away is a perfectly acceptable negotiation tactic. Walking out at the EU summit would be a good move
Unless walking away means disaster, as it does in this case.
May is mental, but she can't be that stupid, can she?
Yawn. Everything means disaster according to you. Voting for Brexit meant disaster according to you. You're the boy who cried disaster, what makes this one different?
I suspect the foreign secretary will somehow get over this invasion of privacy, which is, after all, only his latest attempt to distance himself from a collapsing building of which he was one of the leading architects.
There is something mesmerically psychopathic about the way Boris talks about Brexit betrayal when he is the holder of a great office of state in the government that is – right now – delivering it. His laments recall one of those police TV appeals where the weeping boyfriend of a missing woman looks straight into the camera and pleads for any information as to her whereabouts. I shan’t insult your intelligence by stating who the cops eventually pick up for it.
Boris also revealed he was warming strongly to Donald Trump, who’d be great at negotiating Brexit because “he’d go in bloody hard”. There’s always a slight frisson among the self-styled alphas, isn’t there – the momentary whiff of the beach volleyball scene in Top Gun. Brexit just needs a Kenny Loggins soundtrack, and Trump could be its wingman anytime.
There is something mesmerically psychopathic about the way Boris talks about Brexit betrayal when he is the holder of a great office of state in the government that is – right now – delivering it.
Just because he’s foreign secretary doesn’t mean he gets to decide everything on his own!
Yawn. Everything means disaster according to you. Voting for Brexit meant disaster according to you. You're the boy who cried disaster, what makes this one different?
Did you miss the article from (former) Brexiteer Ian Martin?
The moral of that story is there was a wolf, and all the sheep who ignored the warning were eaten...
I think we have reached the point in the negotiations where we should walk away. We have undermined that move by failing to take the necessary preparations but we should get on with these now as fast as we can. I have always wanted a deal with the EU and have been as pragmatic as any in accepting the terms of that deal but there has to be a limit and for me the limit is the structural integrity of the UK.
In the event that this proposal for a backstop is rejected May should recall our negotiators and tell the EU that we are reconsidering our position.
Of course I am looking to walk away with a view to getting back to the negotiating table for a more sensible discussion but I accept that that may happen after we have left.
Unfortunately we can't bluff, we have no back up plan. The EU would immediately call us and we'd have to slink back to the table. If we had spent £10bn on preparing the nation for a WTO exit then they would have to take it seriously, if we did it now they wouldn't because they'd know it was bullshit.
I think we have reached the point in the negotiations where we should walk away. We have undermined that move by failing to take the necessary preparations but we should get on with these now as fast as we can. I have always wanted a deal with the EU and have been as pragmatic as any in accepting the terms of that deal but there has to be a limit and for me the limit is the structural integrity of the UK.
In the event that this proposal for a backstop is rejected May should recall our negotiators and tell the EU that we are reconsidering our position.
Of course I am looking to walk away with a view to getting back to the negotiating table for a more sensible discussion but I accept that that may happen after we have left.
I think you're right
I agree to - the negotiating position is undermined by our unpreparedness in relation to no deal. If we remove that option we have a weak negotiating position. The case should have been made from the outset to that we would prepare for all eventualities unless those had been ruled out by a formal agreement. We should then have put people supporting the relevant options in positions to develop the best proposal for that option.
Walking away is a perfectly acceptable negotiation tactic. Walking out at the EU summit would be a good move
Unless walking away means disaster, as it does in this case.
May is mental, but she can't be that stupid, can she?
Yawn. Everything means disaster according to you. Voting for Brexit meant disaster according to you. You're the boy who cried disaster, what makes this one different?
I always prefer Garak’s interpretation of the moral of this story.... it’s not that you shouldn’t lie, just don’t tell the same lie twice.
Is Barnier not pushing this NI only backstop agenda now because of the vote in the commons on Tuesday, to ensure customs union defeat for the government in the absence of any other possible agreement so more MPs likely to rebel?
I'm lost to be honest. And not the only one by looks of it:
I think we have reached the point in the negotiations where we should walk away. We have undermined that move by failing to take the necessary preparations but we should get on with these now as fast as we can. I have always wanted a deal with the EU and have been as pragmatic as any in accepting the terms of that deal but there has to be a limit and for me the limit is the structural integrity of the UK.
In the event that this proposal for a backstop is rejected May should recall our negotiators and tell the EU that we are reconsidering our position.
Of course I am looking to walk away with a view to getting back to the negotiating table for a more sensible discussion but I accept that that may happen after we have left.
Unfortunately we can't bluff, we have no back up plan. The EU would immediately call us and we'd have to slink back to the table. If we had spent £10bn on preparing the nation for a WTO exit then they would have to take it seriously, if we did it now they wouldn't because they'd know it was bullshit.
The only thing we could do now is come up with an aggressive taxation policy to support businesses affected. At least that would be a plan.
Do I sense a little discontent among pb's Leavers this afternoon?
Might this afternoon be the afternoon where those Leavers acknowledge that negotiating with the EU hasn't turned out to be quite as straightforward as they had aggressively asserted it would be before the referendum vote?
Is Barnier not pushing this NI only backstop agenda now because of the vote in the commons on Tuesday, to ensure customs union defeat for the government in the absence of any other possible agreement so more MPs likely to rebel?
I'm lost to be honest. And not the only one by looks of it:
I think we have reached the point in the negotiations where we should walk away. We have undermined that move by failing to take the necessary preparations but we should get on with these now as fast as we can. I have always wanted a deal with the EU and have been as pragmatic as any in accepting the terms of that deal but there has to be a limit and for me the limit is the structural integrity of the UK.
In the event that this proposal for a backstop is rejected May should recall our negotiators and tell the EU that we are reconsidering our position.
Of course I am looking to walk away with a view to getting back to the negotiating table for a more sensible discussion but I accept that that may happen after we have left.
Unfortunately we can't bluff, we have no back up plan. The EU would immediately call us and we'd have to slink back to the table. If we had spent £10bn on preparing the nation for a WTO exit then they would have to take it seriously, if we did it now they wouldn't because they'd know it was bullshit.
It is far from ideal but we still have 9 months to put it together. We could if we really wanted to.
Of course a significant percentage of the cabinet does not want to.
I think we have reached the point in the negotiations where we should walk away. We have undermined that move by failing to take the necessary preparations but we should get on with these now as fast as we can. I have always wanted a deal with the EU and have been as pragmatic as any in accepting the terms of that deal but there has to be a limit and for me the limit is the structural integrity of the UK.
In the event that this proposal for a backstop is rejected May should recall our negotiators and tell the EU that we are reconsidering our position.
Of course I am looking to walk away with a view to getting back to the negotiating table for a more sensible discussion but I accept that that may happen after we have left.
Unfortunately we can't bluff, we have no back up plan. The EU would immediately call us and we'd have to slink back to the table. If we had spent £10bn on preparing the nation for a WTO exit then they would have to take it seriously, if we did it now they wouldn't because they'd know it was bullshit.
+1
History will not be kind to the May, Davis, Johnson and Fox.
Do I sense a little discontent among pb's Leavers this afternoon?
Might this afternoon be the afternoon where those Leavers acknowledge that negotiating with the EU hasn't turned out to be quite as straightforward as they had aggressively asserted it would be before the referendum vote?
If leaving now is hard, leaving after further integration would be even worse.
Do I sense a little discontent among pb's Leavers this afternoon?
Might this afternoon be the afternoon where those Leavers acknowledge that negotiating with the EU hasn't turned out to be quite as straightforward as they had aggressively asserted it would be before the referendum vote?
tbf, I'm not sure any Leaver expected TMay to be the one 'negotiating'.
Do I sense a little discontent among pb's Leavers this afternoon?
Might this afternoon be the afternoon where those Leavers acknowledge that negotiating with the EU hasn't turned out to be quite as straightforward as they had aggressively asserted it would be before the referendum vote?
Only because the virulent remainers in the cabinet didn't allow any WTO exit planning. Though I put the blame on Davis for not resigning when the PM denied the planning.
I can imagine her having an hour long meltdown trying to decide whether she wants tea or coffee with her breakfast... Before ultimately choosing orange juice.
I can imagine having an hour long melt-down trying to decide whether she wants tea or coffee with her breakfast... Before ultimately choosing orange juice.
Theresa May strongly believes whatever Olly Robbins last told her.
I can imagine having an hour long melt-down trying to decide whether she wants tea or coffee with her breakfast... Before ultimately choosing orange juice.
She appears to be strongly of the view that she doesn't want to quit. Or be sacked. Or do anything that might precipitate either.
Do I sense a little discontent among pb's Leavers this afternoon?
Might this afternoon be the afternoon where those Leavers acknowledge that negotiating with the EU hasn't turned out to be quite as straightforward as they had aggressively asserted it would be before the referendum vote?
I support leaving since it was decided by referendum butI voted remain, and did not assert anything about the EU negotiation capabilites before the referendum.
I thought that the EU would negotiate in its economic interest, in the same way that I thought staying in was a good idea. Voting leave and the EU negotiating to make themselves worse off to prove a point are two sides of the same coin.
Also just because the EU are manipulative and opportunistic in their negotiations, and difficult to negotiate with, does not negate the valid arguments for leaving. That's the domestic violence argument - can't leave the partner because they are stronger than me.
I heard an MP (Conservative I think) on the radio at lunchtime saying "nobody who voted Leave voted to make themselves poorer". I've heard that many times before too. It is not true. I certainly am willing to be poorer for Brexit. Indeed the whole of government-sponsored Project Fear was a propaganda campaign saying Brexit will make you poorer. Yet Leave won. So if being poorer was to be the price of Brexit, that is what the majority knowingly chose.
I can imagine having an hour long melt-down trying to decide whether she wants tea or coffee with her breakfast... Before ultimately choosing orange juice.
She appears to be strongly of the view that she doesn't want to quit. Or be sacked. Or do anything that might precipitate either.
Well if you wanted any further evidence of her incompetence....
I heard an MP (Conservative I think) on the radio at lunchtime saying "nobody who voted Leave voted to make themselves poorer". I've heard that many times before too. It is not true. I certainly am willing to be poorer for Brexit. Indeed the whole of government-sponsored Project Fear was a propaganda campaign saying Brexit will make you poorer. Yet Leave won. So if being poorer was to be the price of Brexit, that is what the majority knowingly chose.
Do I sense a little discontent among pb's Leavers this afternoon?
Might this afternoon be the afternoon where those Leavers acknowledge that negotiating with the EU hasn't turned out to be quite as straightforward as they had aggressively asserted it would be before the referendum vote?
Only because the virulent remainers in the cabinet didn't allow any WTO exit planning. Though I put the blame on Davis for not resigning when the PM denied the planning.
I suspect the truth is that the Remainers didn't want to risk no deal, and the Brexiteers believed their own bullshit.
I heard an MP (Conservative I think) on the radio at lunchtime saying "nobody who voted Leave voted to make themselves poorer". I've heard that many times before too. It is not true. I certainly am willing to be poorer for Brexit. Indeed the whole of government-sponsored Project Fear was a propaganda campaign saying Brexit will make you poorer. Yet Leave won. So if being poorer was to be the price of Brexit, that is what the majority knowingly chose.
"It is now that I am expecting those surviving UKIP supporters to declare “Now come on, all parties have problems fielding candidates in the year after a general!”"
Are there any UKIP supporters left on here? I thought the whole point was that UKIP having served its purpose is now pointless (unless the Government really is dumb enough to listen to the Remoaners and scrap Brexit).
Cancelling Brexit would be political suicide for the Conservatives, Corbyn would get a big majority.
Economic meltdown no-deal Brexit would be political suicide for the Conservatives, Corbyn [etc]
Parties have no inherent right to exist and I would not be sorry to see the Tory party collapse.
It wouldn't change the fact that there would still be something around at least 50% of the country wanting to vote for right or centre right candidates. The collapse of the Tory party would be no more of a victory for the Left than the Collapse of Labour would be for the Right.
What we lack in this country now is an economically Right wing, small state but very socially liberal party.
May I point you to the UK Libertarian Party who are also standing in next week's Lewisham East by election
Oh yes I am well aware of them and have been following them. If you are looking at the minute parties you can find one to fit any view. I was talking more in terms of parties likely to get into the top ten places on national vote.
Barnier today has effectively said that progress is stalled unless the UK redraws its red lines (Guardian live blog - "He says, if the UK were to adjust their red lines, the EU would adjust their offer").
Rowing back on the red lines is the one thing that might make Johnson and Davis finally resign.
Interesting times.
The EU is bluffing. If they let us crash out without a deal then there's the hardest of hard borders across Ireland.
There is.
They are betting, correctly or incorrectly, that the UK would prefer that not to happen.
Which is why we need to be preparing for it, otherwise our credibility is zero.
Indeed. We f***ed up by ruling out customs posts etc in the first place while they were refusing to do so.
We should have played a straight bat and simply said "our backstop is that whatever trade agreement you give us is what we will give to Ireland, now are you ready to talk or not?" If not, start preparations for a hard Brexit unless they change their mind.
I heard an MP (Conservative I think) on the radio at lunchtime saying "nobody who voted Leave voted to make themselves poorer". I've heard that many times before too. It is not true. I certainly am willing to be poorer for Brexit. Indeed the whole of government-sponsored Project Fear was a propaganda campaign saying Brexit will make you poorer. Yet Leave won. So if being poorer was to be the price of Brexit, that is what the majority knowingly chose.
So you admit the bus was a lie?
Its not. At some point in the future there will be £350mn a week more for the NHS, whether by policy or by inflation.
Barnier today has effectively said that progress is stalled unless the UK redraws its red lines (Guardian live blog - "He says, if the UK were to adjust their red lines, the EU would adjust their offer").
Rowing back on the red lines is the one thing that might make Johnson and Davis finally resign.
Interesting times.
The EU is bluffing. If they let us crash out without a deal then there's the hardest of hard borders across Ireland.
Maybe they are, but we've heard many times over the last two years that the EU are bluffing over something or other and every single time May capitulates.
That is a reflection of May not of the EU position.
I heard an MP (Conservative I think) on the radio at lunchtime saying "nobody who voted Leave voted to make themselves poorer". I've heard that many times before too. It is not true. I certainly am willing to be poorer for Brexit. Indeed the whole of government-sponsored Project Fear was a propaganda campaign saying Brexit will make you poorer. Yet Leave won. So if being poorer was to be the price of Brexit, that is what the majority knowingly chose.
Well some number, how many is hard to know, will have disbelieved that they would be poorer. But everyone was certainly told it. The weighing of the options was about whether any gains would outweigh the costs, in the end. Regrettably, it doesn't seem particularly hopeful that they will.
I can imagine having an hour long melt-down trying to decide whether she wants tea or coffee with her breakfast... Before ultimately choosing orange juice.
Theresa May strongly believes whatever Olly Robbins last told her.
I am immediately suspicious when people suddenly start blaming officials for everything. The same thing happened after the GE. Is this Robbins really so powerful? (which is the implication - if it was just about May being weak, she would believe other people too)
Do I sense a little discontent among pb's Leavers this afternoon?
Might this afternoon be the afternoon where those Leavers acknowledge that negotiating with the EU hasn't turned out to be quite as straightforward as they had aggressively asserted it would be before the referendum vote?
Only because the virulent remainers in the cabinet didn't allow any WTO exit planning. Though I put the blame on Davis for not resigning when the PM denied the planning.
I suspect the truth is that the Remainers didn't want to risk no deal, and the Brexiteers believed their own bullshit.
Yes that's probably right. Though if they had bought any single report from the City they would have been able to read the advice to prepare for a WTO exit "just in case".
"It is now that I am expecting those surviving UKIP supporters to declare “Now come on, all parties have problems fielding candidates in the year after a general!”"
Are there any UKIP supporters left on here? I thought the whole point was that UKIP having served its purpose is now pointless (unless the Government really is dumb enough to listen to the Remoaners and scrap Brexit).
Cancelling Brexit would be political suicide for the Conservatives, Corbyn would get a big majority.
Economic meltdown no-deal Brexit would be political suicide for the Conservatives, Corbyn [etc]
Parties have no inherent right to exist and I would not be sorry to see the Tory party collapse.
It wouldn't change the fact that there would still be something around at least 50% of the country wanting to vote for right or centre right candidates. The collapse of the Tory party would be no more of a victory for the Left than the Collapse of Labour would be for the Right.
What we lack in this country now is an economically Right wing, small state but very socially liberal party.
May I point you to the UK Libertarian Party who are also standing in next week's Lewisham East by election
Oh yes I am well aware of them and have been following them. If you are looking at the minute parties you can find one to fit any view. I was talking more in terms of parties likely to get into the top ten places on national vote.
In the US Gary Johnson got about 3% in 2016 on the Libertarian ticket and came third and in Germany the Libertarian FDP got about 10% in 2017
Yes that's probably right. Though if they had bought any single report from the City they would have been able to read the advice to prepare for a WTO exit "just in case".
Prepare to close all the car factories and concrete over Kent.
Is Barnier not pushing this NI only backstop agenda now because of the vote in the commons on Tuesday, to ensure customs union defeat for the government in the absence of any other possible agreement so more MPs likely to rebel?
I'm lost to be honest. And not the only one by looks of it:
Barnier clearly is trying to row back on what he signed up to in December, not sure if legally he can?
Good point. Maybe May should have just repeated those words from the December agreement as the UK back-up proposal. Barnier could hardly object to that. It isn't even time limited.
EDIT David Davis's people could have consulted with their Irish opposite number as to the specific scope and regulations and included that in their proposal.
Yes that's probably right. Though if they had bought any single report from the City they would have been able to read the advice to prepare for a WTO exit "just in case".
Prepare to close all the car factories and concrete over Kent.
I can imagine her having an hour long meltdown trying to decide whether she wants tea or coffee with her breakfast... Before ultimately choosing orange juice.
'Mrs May, what is your ideal breakfast?'
'I enjoy all kinds of breakfast. I have breakfast every day. However, at a time like this we should be thinking of those who have no breakfast. The suffering of hunger is what gets me out of bed in the morning.'
"It is now that I am expecting those surviving UKIP supporters to declare “Now come on, all parties have problems fielding candidates in the year after a general!”"
Are there any UKIP supporters left on here? I thought the whole point was that UKIP having served its purpose is now pointless (unless the Government really is dumb enough to listen to the Remoaners and scrap Brexit).
Cancelling Brexit would be political suicide for the Conservatives, Corbyn would get a big majority.
Economic meltdown no-deal Brexit would be political suicide for the Conservatives, Corbyn [etc]
Parties have no inherent right to exist and I would not be sorry to see the Tory party collapse.
It wouldn't change the fact that there would still be something around at least 50% of the country wanting to vote for right or centre right candidates. The collapse of the Tory party would be no more of a victory for the Left than the Collapse of Labour would be for the Right.
What we lack in this country now is an economically Right wing, small state but very socially liberal party.
May I point you to the UK Libertarian Party who are also standing in next week's Lewisham East by election
The problem is that while libertarianism punches above its weight intellectually, it has very little mass appeal.
Indeed, the biggest libertarian demographic is rich single white males living in London with no family ties and little need of public services and there are not enough of those to get much beyond 10%
Um no.
With the exception of one notable but unfortunately now deceased leader who was gay and lived with his partner, every single person I know in the Libertarian Alliance fails to meet that description. A tiny minority of them live in London, the overwhelming majority are married with kids and a significant number are female or from ethnic minorities. The two most vocal proponents on here - Robert and myself - are both married with kids and neither of us live anywhere near London.
I do however accept that libertarianism even in its strongly secular UK form is a very minority view. However a less radical form as I described - smaller state, socially very liberal but economically dry - is certainly, I believe, a position that a party could gain support for.
Comments
The likelihood of this all going spectacularly tits-up, and the parties rupturing to shed their more extreme fringes (which, in the case of Labour, includes the leadership), seems greater every day.
£10 on Cable being the next PM may not be as outlandish as it sounds.
https://libertarianpartyuk.com/
Yet again, Survation has the public split 50/50 on Brexit (as did this morning's Yougov poll).
https://www.betfair.com/exchange/plus/politics/market/1.125575094
My book isn't big enough to lay him at 450/980 personally.
There's no backstop in Article 50 today. Why should any backstop last one day longer than the transition?
By the end of the transition then we either need a new system or a new transition.
John Lamont, the Conservative MSP complained to the Commissioner for Ethical Standards in Public Life in Scotland, who informed him that investigation of MPs was not their responsibility. No complaint was ever made to the Westminster Parliamentary Commissioner for Standards which did have jurisdiction. Nevertheless, he and others ensured the local and national press and media were inundated with stories about the 'investigation' and 'scandal' and who naturally found every opportunity to repeat them verbatim for the next two years.
Corri Wilson was not then, nor has ever been, under investigation by either body, on any issue.
Though the regulatory alignment May agreed for the UK in December seemed fine with Barnier then
The UK can and will decide in that scenario to use electronic customs declarations and spot checks well away from the actual border.
I don’t see any evidence of Ireland or the EU preparing for anything that looks like a border either, so they’re undoubtedly also bluffing.
https://twitter.com/faisalislam/status/1005121567502864384
In the event that this proposal for a backstop is rejected May should recall our negotiators and tell the EU that we are reconsidering our position.
Of course I am looking to walk away with a view to getting back to the negotiating table for a more sensible discussion but I accept that that may happen after we have left.
Not unlike Honorius, she's more skilled at outwitting her own lieutenants than her adversaries.
“How many angels may dance on the head of a finger of fudge?”
https://capx.co/welcome-to-dads-army-brexit/
May is mental, but she can't be that stupid, can she?
EDIT David Davis's people could have consulted with their Irish opposite number as to the specific scope and regulations and included that in their proposal.
There is something mesmerically psychopathic about the way Boris talks about Brexit betrayal when he is the holder of a great office of state in the government that is – right now – delivering it. His laments recall one of those police TV appeals where the weeping boyfriend of a missing woman looks straight into the camera and pleads for any information as to her whereabouts. I shan’t insult your intelligence by stating who the cops eventually pick up for it.
Boris also revealed he was warming strongly to Donald Trump, who’d be great at negotiating Brexit because “he’d go in bloody hard”. There’s always a slight frisson among the self-styled alphas, isn’t there – the momentary whiff of the beach volleyball scene in Top Gun. Brexit just needs a Kenny Loggins soundtrack, and Trump could be its wingman anytime.
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/jun/08/top-guns-brexit-eu-machismo-tories
- EU are signatories to GFA to maintain open border, so are just as on the hook as UK.
- If UK does walk away or GTO otherwise occurs, the EU are committed to maintain at least one open border with an MFN country.
- What they do with one MFN country they will have to do for others.
So, much of the peril that applies to the UK in terms of post Brexit third country relationships, might also apply to the EU....
I may be talking utter rubbish, I'm no legal, but on the logic above, could the EU be as tied in knots by the Ireland conundrum as we are?
They are betting, correctly or incorrectly, that the UK would prefer that not to happen.
Which is why we need to be preparing for it, otherwise our credibility is zero.
Just because he’s foreign secretary doesn’t mean he gets to decide everything on his own!
The moral of that story is there was a wolf, and all the sheep who ignored the warning were eaten...
We won’t though.
https://twitter.com/AaronBastani/status/1005128822969290755
They bravely ran away
Might this afternoon be the afternoon where those Leavers acknowledge that negotiating with the EU hasn't turned out to be quite as straightforward as they had aggressively asserted it would be before the referendum vote?
Of course a significant percentage of the cabinet does not want to.
History will not be kind to the May, Davis, Johnson and Fox.
tbf, I'm not sure any Leaver expected TMay to be the one 'negotiating'.
I can imagine her having an hour long meltdown trying to decide whether she wants tea or coffee with her breakfast... Before ultimately choosing orange juice.
I thought that the EU would negotiate in its economic interest, in the same way that I thought staying in was a good idea. Voting leave and the EU negotiating to make themselves worse off to prove a point are two sides of the same coin.
Also just because the EU are manipulative and opportunistic in their negotiations, and difficult to negotiate with, does not negate the valid arguments for leaving. That's the domestic violence argument - can't leave the partner because they are stronger than me.
The Leave campaign(s) insisted there was no cost
£350m a week for the NHS doesn't sound "poorer" to anyone who voted for it
We should have played a straight bat and simply said "our backstop is that whatever trade agreement you give us is what we will give to Ireland, now are you ready to talk or not?" If not, start preparations for a hard Brexit unless they change their mind.
https://www.standard.co.uk/news/politics/donald-trump-poised-for-bust-up-at-g7-summit-over-trade-tariffs-a3858716.html
https://www.standard.co.uk/news/politics/donald-trump-poised-for-bust-up-at-g7-summit-over-trade-tariffs-a3858716.html
No idea why they didn't want to do that...
'I enjoy all kinds of breakfast. I have breakfast every day. However, at a time like this we should be thinking of those who have no breakfast. The suffering of hunger is what gets me out of bed in the morning.'
With the exception of one notable but unfortunately now deceased leader who was gay and lived with his partner, every single person I know in the Libertarian Alliance fails to meet that description. A tiny minority of them live in London, the overwhelming majority are married with kids and a significant number are female or from ethnic minorities. The two most vocal proponents on here - Robert and myself - are both married with kids and neither of us live anywhere near London.
I do however accept that libertarianism even in its strongly secular UK form is a very minority view. However a less radical form as I described - smaller state, socially very liberal but economically dry - is certainly, I believe, a position that a party could gain support for.