Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

Options

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » If Trump bothers to read UK polls he won’t be pleased about ho

124

Comments

  • Options
    Sean_FSean_F Posts: 35,878
    Scott_P said:

    currystar said:

    What should happen?

    Honesty from politicians.

    Sanctions for dishonesty.

    Public Enquiry.

    Another vote, or votes.

    And before the "if it goes the same way crowd" start, it can't go "the same way" because unicorns and rainbows will not be on the ballot next time.
    If the Chequers deal were agreed by the EU (and I share David Herdson's scepticism) it would not be possible for the Remain side to convincingly argue that there would be horrors in store,
  • Options
    dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 27,995
  • Options
    Tissue_PriceTissue_Price Posts: 9,039
    dixiedean said:

    Sandpit said:

    currystar said:
    The 'well-placed Brussels official' is still only the servant of the European Council in this matter, if that. If the EU takes its leadership from Varadkar - and he's been instrumental in that role so far - then its directions to Barnier might yet change.

    That said, I stand by my comments from my Saturday piece that the Chequers Deal, and the White Paper leading from it, are close to a straw man: it was produced in the full knowledge that Brussels was likely to knock it back. Perhaps they won't, in which case, great. But if they do then the negotiations have nowhere to go.
    With the publication of the White Paper the ball is now in the EU’s court. If they think they can work on a deal from here then great, but if they can’t then we need to agree quickly that that’s the case, so we can spend the next nine months working through the exit strategy to keep planes flying and goods moving around.
    Mmm. Maybe today might have been a good one to think about triggering Article 50. Then we'd have had 2 years to do that?
    Just a thought.
    It was the EU that insisted on "no negotiation without notification". Our position today is informed by the negotiation we have had with the EU.
  • Options
    rpjsrpjs Posts: 3,787
    Sandpit said:

    Sandpit said:

    currystar said:
    The 'well-placed Brussels official' is still only the servant of the European Council in this matter, if that. If the EU takes its leadership from Varadkar - and he's been instrumental in that role so far - then its directions to Barnier might yet change.

    That said, I stand by my comments from my Saturday piece that the Chequers Deal, and the White Paper leading from it, are close to a straw man: it was produced in the full knowledge that Brussels was likely to knock it back. Perhaps they won't, in which case, great. But if they do then the negotiations have nowhere to go.
    With the publication of the White Paper the ball is now in the EU’s court. If they think they can work on a deal from here then great, but if they can’t then we need to agree quickly that that’s the case, so we can spend the next nine months working through the exit strategy to keep planes flying and goods moving around.
    It's not in the EU's interests to move quickly on this. It's in the EU's interests to run down the clock to turn the thumbscrews on May and let the panic build.
    Of course it is. Hence my previous suggestion that unless we quickly get a deal/no-deal response, we announce that we are starting to spend the £39bn at £1bn/week until a deal gets done.
    Just throwing money at something isn't necessarily a solution (haven't we heard that line from PB Tories again and again over the years?). For instance, how long will it take to recruit and adequately train the customs officers necessary for a no-deal Brexit next March?
  • Options
    Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 49,373
    Scott_P said:
    North west? What about the North east??
  • Options
    SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,927
    edited July 2018

    Sandpit said:

    Sandpit said:

    currystar said:
    The 'well-placed Brussels official' is still only the servant of the European Council in this matter, if that. If the EU takes its leadership from Varadkar - and he's been instrumental in that role so far - then its directions to Barnier might yet change.

    That said, I stand by my comments from my Saturday piece that the Chequers Deal, and the White Paper leading from it, are close to a straw man: it was produced in the full knowledge that Brussels was likely to knock it back. Perhaps they won't, in which case, great. But if they do then the negotiations have nowhere to go.
    With the publication of the White Paper the ball is now in the EU’s court. If they think they can work on a deal from here then great, but if they can’t then we need to agree quickly that that’s the case, so we can spend the next nine months working through the exit strategy to keep planes flying and goods moving around.
    It's not in the EU's interests to move quickly on this. It's in the EU's interests to run down the clock to turn the thumbscrews on May and let the panic build.
    Of course it is. Hence my previous suggestion that unless we quickly get a deal/no-deal response, we announce that we are starting to spend the £39bn at £1bn/week until a deal gets done.
    Surely the deal has to be approved by the EU Parliament - that won't be quick.
    Yes it does need to go through the Parliament - one of those things that should be a formality in theory but in practice, well its the EU Parliament.

    That Remainers are piling in to rubbish the suggestion that we start seriously preparing for the no-deal scenario gives the impression that they would prefer us to crash out unprepared.
  • Options
    NigelbNigelb Posts: 62,762
    Good to see that Trump was met by an appropriately high level delegation -
    The US President and First Lady were greeted by International Trade Secretary Liam Fox, the Queen's representative and the chief operating officer of Stansted Airport...
  • Options
    Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 60,345
    dixiedean said:
    Re Airbus - not only are 40,000 jobs at risk but over 120,000 in the supply chain.

    In North Wales it would be as bad, if not worse, then when the pits closed and we all know the anger and violence that caused.

    I am hopeful TM gets a deal, irrespective of the political cost, as there is no other choice but to campaign to remain, and that is a big move in my attitude. I just will not accept a hard Brexit.

    It would devastate our economy here in North Wales and we have nothing to replace it with.

    The Brexiteers account for 25% of my party's MP's so it is upto the 75% to stand up to this UKIP element and form cross party alliances, excluding Corbyn of course, to act in the National interest
  • Options
    dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 27,995

    dixiedean said:

    Sandpit said:

    currystar said:
    The 'well-placed Brussels official' is still only the servant of the European Council in this matter, if that. If the EU takes its leadership from Varadkar - and he's been instrumental in that role so far - then its directions to Barnier might yet change.

    That said, I stand by my comments from my Saturday piece that the Chequers Deal, and the White Paper leading from it, are close to a straw man: it was produced in the full knowledge that Brussels was likely to knock it back. Perhaps they won't, in which case, great. But if they do then the negotiations have nowhere to go.
    With the publication of the White Paper the ball is now in the EU’s court. If they think they can work on a deal from here then great, but if they can’t then we need to agree quickly that that’s the case, so we can spend the next nine months working through the exit strategy to keep planes flying and goods moving around.
    Mmm. Maybe today might have been a good one to think about triggering Article 50. Then we'd have had 2 years to do that?
    Just a thought.
    It was the EU that insisted on "no negotiation without notification". Our position today is informed by the negotiation we have had with the EU.
    Not negotiation within the Cabinet?
  • Options
    NigelbNigelb Posts: 62,762

    dixiedean said:
    Re Airbus - not only are 40,000 jobs at risk but over 120,000 in the supply chain.

    In North Wales it would be as bad, if not worse, then when the pits closed and we all know the anger and violence that caused.

    I am hopeful TM gets a deal, irrespective of the political cost, as there is no other choice but to campaign to remain, and that is a big move in my attitude. I just will not accept a hard Brexit.

    It would devastate our economy here in North Wales and we have nothing to replace it with.

    The Brexiteers account for 25% of my party's MP's so it is upto the 75% to stand up to this UKIP element and form cross party alliances, excluding Corbyn of course, to act in the National interest
    We might disagree on many things, Big G, but of late you have been the voice of Tory reason.
  • Options
    Tissue_PriceTissue_Price Posts: 9,039
    dixiedean said:

    dixiedean said:

    Sandpit said:

    currystar said:
    The 'well-placed Brussels official' is still only the servant of the European Council in this matter, if that. If the EU takes its leadership from Varadkar - and he's been instrumental in that role so far - then its directions to Barnier might yet change.

    That said, I stand by my comments from my Saturday piece that the Chequers Deal, and the White Paper leading from it, are close to a straw man: it was produced in the full knowledge that Brussels was likely to knock it back. Perhaps they won't, in which case, great. But if they do then the negotiations have nowhere to go.
    With the publication of the White Paper the ball is now in the EU’s court. If they think they can work on a deal from here then great, but if they can’t then we need to agree quickly that that’s the case, so we can spend the next nine months working through the exit strategy to keep planes flying and goods moving around.
    Mmm. Maybe today might have been a good one to think about triggering Article 50. Then we'd have had 2 years to do that?
    Just a thought.
    It was the EU that insisted on "no negotiation without notification". Our position today is informed by the negotiation we have had with the EU.
    Not negotiation within the Cabinet?
    That too, of course.
  • Options
    RoyalBlueRoyalBlue Posts: 3,223
    edited July 2018

    dixiedean said:
    Re Airbus - not only are 40,000 jobs at risk but over 120,000 in the supply chain.

    In North Wales it would be as bad, if not worse, then when the pits closed and we all know the anger and violence that caused.

    I am hopeful TM gets a deal, irrespective of the political cost, as there is no other choice but to campaign to remain, and that is a big move in my attitude. I just will not accept a hard Brexit.

    It would devastate our economy here in North Wales and we have nothing to replace it with.

    The Brexiteers account for 25% of my party's MP's so it is upto the 75% to stand up to this UKIP element and form cross party alliances, excluding Corbyn of course, to act in the National interest
    Brexiteers are more like 45% of the parliamentary party, old chum. We are certainly a clear majority of activists and Tory voters.

    The idea that Theresa May can lead a cross-party alliance of BINOers in Parliament is fantasy. Labour will oppose, whatever she brings back.
  • Options
    TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 41,389

    dixiedean said:
    Re Airbus - not only are 40,000 jobs at risk but over 120,000 in the supply chain.

    In North Wales it would be as bad, if not worse, then when the pits closed and we all know the anger and violence that caused.

    I am hopeful TM gets a deal, irrespective of the political cost, as there is no other choice but to campaign to remain, and that is a big move in my attitude. I just will not accept a hard Brexit.

    It would devastate our economy here in North Wales and we have nothing to replace it with.

    The Brexiteers account for 25% of my party's MP's so it is upto the 75% to stand up to this UKIP element and form cross party alliances, excluding Corbyn of course, to act in the National interest
    Welcome on board Big G. I am sorry to say that this was always where we would end up.

    Can't remember whether you were a Leaver or Remainer but this is no surprise to many of us.
  • Options
    SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,927
    rpjs said:

    Sandpit said:

    Sandpit said:

    currystar said:
    The 'well-placed Brussels official' is still only the servant of the European Council in this matter, if that. If the EU takes its leadership from Varadkar - and he's been instrumental in that role so far - then its directions to Barnier might yet change.

    That said, I stand by my comments from my Saturday piece that the Chequers Deal, and the White Paper leading from it, are close to a straw man: it was produced in the full knowledge that Brussels was likely to knock it back. Perhaps they won't, in which case, great. But if they do then the negotiations have nowhere to go.
    With the publication of the White Paper the ball is now in the EU’s court. If they think they can work on a deal from here then great, but if they can’t then we need to agree quickly that that’s the case, so we can spend the next nine months working through the exit strategy to keep planes flying and goods moving around.
    It's not in the EU's interests to move quickly on this. It's in the EU's interests to run down the clock to turn the thumbscrews on May and let the panic build.
    Of course it is. Hence my previous suggestion that unless we quickly get a deal/no-deal response, we announce that we are starting to spend the £39bn at £1bn/week until a deal gets done.
    Just throwing money at something isn't necessarily a solution (haven't we heard that line from PB Tories again and again over the years?). For instance, how long will it take to recruit and adequately train the customs officers necessary for a no-deal Brexit next March?
    Throwing money at the problem doesn’t always provide an optimum solution in terms of readiness or value for money, but it’s a hell of a lot better than meekly handing it to the EU as they run the clock down to no deal.
  • Options
    grabcocquegrabcocque Posts: 4,234
    edited July 2018

    dixiedean said:

    Sandpit said:

    currystar said:
    The 'well-placed Brussels official' is still only the servant of the European Council in this matter, if that. If the EU takes its leadership from Varadkar - and he's been instrumental in that role so far - then its directions to Barnier might yet change.

    That said, I stand by my comments from my Saturday piece that the Chequers Deal, and the White Paper leading from it, are close to a straw man: it was produced in the full knowledge that Brussels was likely to knock it back. Perhaps they won't, in which case, great. But if they do then the negotiations have nowhere to go.
    With the publication of the White Paper the ball is now in the EU’s court. If they think they can work on a deal from here then great, but if they can’t then we need to agree quickly that that’s the case, so we can spend the next nine months working through the exit strategy to keep planes flying and goods moving around.
    Mmm. Maybe today might have been a good one to think about triggering Article 50. Then we'd have had 2 years to do that?
    Just a thought.
    It was the EU that insisted on "no negotiation without notification". Our position today is informed by the negotiation we have had with the EU.
    That was "no negotiation with the EU", when the cabinet has spent the last 18 months negotiating only with itself.

    It was an act of manifest incompetence on a massive scale that May was allowed to press the big red start button before she had the slightest fucking idea where she wanted to end up.
  • Options
    Sean_FSean_F Posts: 35,878

    dixiedean said:
    Re Airbus - not only are 40,000 jobs at risk but over 120,000 in the supply chain.

    In North Wales it would be as bad, if not worse, then when the pits closed and we all know the anger and violence that caused.

    I am hopeful TM gets a deal, irrespective of the political cost, as there is no other choice but to campaign to remain, and that is a big move in my attitude. I just will not accept a hard Brexit.

    It would devastate our economy here in North Wales and we have nothing to replace it with.

    The Brexiteers account for 25% of my party's MP's so it is upto the 75% to stand up to this UKIP element and form cross party alliances, excluding Corbyn of course, to act in the National interest
    If Theresa May cannot get a deal, then I would reluctantly favour a No Deal Brexit.
  • Options
    DavidLDavidL Posts: 51,356
    Nigelb said:

    Good to see that Trump was met by an appropriately high level delegation -
    The US President and First Lady were greeted by International Trade Secretary Liam Fox, the Queen's representative and the chief operating officer of Stansted Airport...

    May is really not going out of her way to hide her distaste is she?
  • Options
    grabcocquegrabcocque Posts: 4,234
    Sean_F said:


    If Theresa May cannot get a deal, then I would reluctantly favour a No Deal Brexit.

    Would you support a negotiated BRINO deal that needs Labour votes to get through Parliament?

  • Options
    Sean_FSean_F Posts: 35,878
    DavidL said:

    Nigelb said:

    Good to see that Trump was met by an appropriately high level delegation -
    The US President and First Lady were greeted by International Trade Secretary Liam Fox, the Queen's representative and the chief operating officer of Stansted Airport...

    May is really not going out of her way to hide her distaste is she?
    Maybe Trump has made lewd suggestions to her.
  • Options
    tpfkartpfkar Posts: 1,548
    Sean_F said:

    Scott_P said:

    currystar said:

    What should happen?

    Honesty from politicians.

    Sanctions for dishonesty.

    Public Enquiry.

    Another vote, or votes.

    And before the "if it goes the same way crowd" start, it can't go "the same way" because unicorns and rainbows will not be on the ballot next time.
    If the Chequers deal were agreed by the EU (and I share David Herdson's scepticism) it would not be possible for the Remain side to convincingly argue that there would be horrors in store,
    Oh I don't know about that - the Facilitated Customs wotsit looks a right faff with us taking the higher tariff on entry, and then reimbursing you if it didn't end up where you expected. So I import 20 widgets, sell them over the internet and pay up, have to track who buys them and claim back the ones sold to the UK market. I reckon once businesses get their heads round that there will be some howls.
  • Options
    Sean_FSean_F Posts: 35,878

    Sean_F said:


    If Theresa May cannot get a deal, then I would reluctantly favour a No Deal Brexit.

    Would you support a negotiated BRINO deal that needs Labour votes to get through Parliament?

    I could live with being in EFTA, or with the kind of proposals that were produced at Chequers.
  • Options
    dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 27,995

    dixiedean said:

    Sandpit said:

    currystar said:
    The 'well-placed Brussels official' is still only the servant of the European Council in this matter, if that. If the EU takes its leadership from Varadkar - and he's been instrumental in that role so far - then its directions to Barnier might yet change.

    That said, I stand by my comments from my Saturday piece that the Chequers Deal, and the White Paper leading from it, are close to a straw man: it was produced in the full knowledge that Brussels was likely to knock it back. Perhaps they won't, in which case, great. But if they do then the negotiations have nowhere to go.
    With the publication of the White Paper the ball is now in the EU’s court. If they think they can work on a deal from here then great, but if they can’t then we need to agree quickly that that’s the case, so we can spend the next nine months working through the exit strategy to keep planes flying and goods moving around.
    Mmm. Maybe today might have been a good one to think about triggering Article 50. Then we'd have had 2 years to do that?
    Just a thought.
    It was the EU that insisted on "no negotiation without notification". Our position today is informed by the negotiation we have had with the EU.
    That was "no negotiation with the EU", when the cabinet has spent the last 18 months negotiating only with itself.

    It was an act of manifest incompetence on a massive scale that May was allowed to press the big red start button before she had the slightest fucking idea where she wanted to end up.
    +1. My sentiments entirely, if not my language.
  • Options
    Sean_FSean_F Posts: 35,878
    tpfkar said:

    Sean_F said:

    Scott_P said:

    currystar said:

    What should happen?

    Honesty from politicians.

    Sanctions for dishonesty.

    Public Enquiry.

    Another vote, or votes.

    And before the "if it goes the same way crowd" start, it can't go "the same way" because unicorns and rainbows will not be on the ballot next time.
    If the Chequers deal were agreed by the EU (and I share David Herdson's scepticism) it would not be possible for the Remain side to convincingly argue that there would be horrors in store,
    Oh I don't know about that - the Facilitated Customs wotsit looks a right faff with us taking the higher tariff on entry, and then reimbursing you if it didn't end up where you expected. So I import 20 widgets, sell them over the internet and pay up, have to track who buys them and claim back the ones sold to the UK market. I reckon once businesses get their heads round that there will be some howls.
    I daresay, but it's hardly Punishment Budget territory.
  • Options
    rkrkrkrkrkrk Posts: 7,908

    Mr. Herdson, she may end up facing such a vote anyway, but I agree if she gives more ground it becomes nigh on certain.

    True - though I think that were she to have faced a VoNC based on the Chequers agreement, we'd know by now. I think the most dangerous time was between Boris' resignation and the 1922 cttee meeting. That said, if something comes out in the WP that makes it look like MPs have been duped, it's game on again.
    Oddly, I think the most dangerous time was actually a couple of weeks earlier. Imagine what would have happened if Boris had regretfully resigned over Heathrow, in a dignified way which didn't look opportunistic (although it would have been, of course). He'd then have been free to lay into the White Paper from the back benches, without looking a complete shyster.

    Rather pleasingly, he seems to have knifed himself in the back. What a shame.
    Probably the worst time he could have resigned. As you say, rather pleasing.
  • Options
    Richard_NabaviRichard_Nabavi Posts: 30,820
    tpfkar said:

    Sean_F said:

    Scott_P said:

    currystar said:

    What should happen?

    Honesty from politicians.

    Sanctions for dishonesty.

    Public Enquiry.

    Another vote, or votes.

    And before the "if it goes the same way crowd" start, it can't go "the same way" because unicorns and rainbows will not be on the ballot next time.
    If the Chequers deal were agreed by the EU (and I share David Herdson's scepticism) it would not be possible for the Remain side to convincingly argue that there would be horrors in store,
    Oh I don't know about that - the Facilitated Customs wotsit looks a right faff with us taking the higher tariff on entry, and then reimbursing you if it didn't end up where you expected. So I import 20 widgets, sell them over the internet and pay up, have to track who buys them and claim back the ones sold to the UK market. I reckon once businesses get their heads round that there will be some howls.
    You already have to do exactly that to complete your VAT return.
  • Options
    NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 21,353



    Why would it be no deal? Why wouldn't May concede again and again like she already has?

    She has no space left. She'll be no confidenced if she concedes any significant ground from here. My reading is that a lot of MPs (and cabinet ministers) are prepared to give this a shot as a last offer but won't go further.
    I think you are both being uncharacteristically a bit unreasonable (every negotiation will have some movement and compromise, you can't expect the paper to be adopted entirely without change) and underestimating the capacity of both May and the EU for generating chaff and fudge on an epic scale. I predict there will be a deal, and none of us will be clear what it means, with much left for resolution by subsequent implementing bodies.
  • Options
    dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 27,995
    edited July 2018
    RoyalBlue said:

    dixiedean said:
    Re Airbus - not only are 40,000 jobs at risk but over 120,000 in the supply chain.

    In North Wales it would be as bad, if not worse, then when the pits closed and we all know the anger and violence that caused.

    I am hopeful TM gets a deal, irrespective of the political cost, as there is no other choice but to campaign to remain, and that is a big move in my attitude. I just will not accept a hard Brexit.

    It would devastate our economy here in North Wales and we have nothing to replace it with.

    The Brexiteers account for 25% of my party's MP's so it is upto the 75% to stand up to this UKIP element and form cross party alliances, excluding Corbyn of course, to act in the National interest
    Brexiteers are more like 45% of the parliamentary party, old chum. We are certainly a clear majority of activists and Tory voters.

    The idea that Theresa May can lead a cross-party alliance of BINOers in Parliament is fantasy. Labour will oppose, whatever she brings back.
    Which is why the logic leads to referendum.
    This deal (ie, whatever is come up with) or none at all? That will be the question.
  • Options
    TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 41,389
    Sean_F said:

    dixiedean said:
    Re Airbus - not only are 40,000 jobs at risk but over 120,000 in the supply chain.

    In North Wales it would be as bad, if not worse, then when the pits closed and we all know the anger and violence that caused.

    I am hopeful TM gets a deal, irrespective of the political cost, as there is no other choice but to campaign to remain, and that is a big move in my attitude. I just will not accept a hard Brexit.

    It would devastate our economy here in North Wales and we have nothing to replace it with.

    The Brexiteers account for 25% of my party's MP's so it is upto the 75% to stand up to this UKIP element and form cross party alliances, excluding Corbyn of course, to act in the National interest
    If Theresa May cannot get a deal, then I would reluctantly favour a No Deal Brexit.
    You see, Big G? They still want to fuck over you and your family.
  • Options
    currystarcurrystar Posts: 1,171
    Does the EU want a No Deal as they must realise it is now a real possibility?
  • Options
    DavidLDavidL Posts: 51,356

    dixiedean said:

    Sandpit said:

    currystar said:
    The 'well-placed Brussels official' is still only the servant of the European Council in this matter, if that. If the EU takes its leadership from Varadkar - and he's been instrumental in that role so far - then its directions to Barnier might yet change.

    That said, I stand by my comments from my Saturday piece that the Chequers Deal, and the White Paper leading from it, are close to a straw man: it was produced in the full knowledge that Brussels was likely to knock it back. Perhaps they won't, in which case, great. But if they do then the negotiations have nowhere to go.
    With the publication of the White Paper the ball is now in the EU’s court. If they think they can work on a deal from here then great, but if they can’t then we need to agree quickly that that’s the case, so we can spend the next nine months working through the exit strategy to keep planes flying and goods moving around.
    Mmm. Maybe today might have been a good one to think about triggering Article 50. Then we'd have had 2 years to do that?
    Just a thought.
    It was the EU that insisted on "no negotiation without notification". Our position today is informed by the negotiation we have had with the EU.
    That was "no negotiation with the EU", when the cabinet has spent the last 18 months negotiating only with itself.

    It was an act of manifest incompetence on a massive scale that May was allowed to press the big red start button before she had the slightest fucking idea where she wanted to end up.
    Impossible not to agree with that. The Chequers meeting or meetings should have been before the Article 50 notice was served. The White paper today (or more accurately its equivalent) should have been published and debated before the notice was served too. Had it been so we would be in a much better position today and any deal with the EU would have been a lot more palatable. I am pretty disgusted with the way that May has put internal party politics ahead of the national interest on this. It is shameful.

    That said, I accept it is in our interests to have a deal now, even on these terms. We are where we are and where we are is in a shithole with the clock running down and nothing done to create a viable alternative. Shameful.
  • Options
    Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 65,826
    TOPPING said:

    Sean_F said:

    dixiedean said:
    Re Airbus - not only are 40,000 jobs at risk but over 120,000 in the supply chain.

    In North Wales it would be as bad, if not worse, then when the pits closed and we all know the anger and violence that caused.

    I am hopeful TM gets a deal, irrespective of the political cost, as there is no other choice but to campaign to remain, and that is a big move in my attitude. I just will not accept a hard Brexit.

    It would devastate our economy here in North Wales and we have nothing to replace it with.

    The Brexiteers account for 25% of my party's MP's so it is upto the 75% to stand up to this UKIP element and form cross party alliances, excluding Corbyn of course, to act in the National interest
    If Theresa May cannot get a deal, then I would reluctantly favour a No Deal Brexit.
    You see, Big G? They still want to fuck over you and your family.
    Or they don't believe the Chicken Licken cowardice and doom-mongering.
  • Options
    NigelbNigelb Posts: 62,762

    dixiedean said:

    Sandpit said:

    currystar said:
    The 'well-placed Brussels official' is still only the servant of the European Council in this matter, if that. If the EU takes its leadership from Varadkar - and he's been instrumental in that role so far - then its directions to Barnier might yet change.

    That said, I stand by my comments from my Saturday piece that the Chequers Deal, and the White Paper leading from it, are close to a straw man: it was produced in the full knowledge that Brussels was likely to knock it back. Perhaps they won't, in which case, great. But if they do then the negotiations have nowhere to go.
    With the publication of the White Paper the ball is now in the EU’s court. If they think they can work on a deal from here then great, but if they can’t then we need to agree quickly that that’s the case, so we can spend the next nine months working through the exit strategy to keep planes flying and goods moving around.
    Mmm. Maybe today might have been a good one to think about triggering Article 50. Then we'd have had 2 years to do that?
    Just a thought.
    It was the EU that insisted on "no negotiation without notification". Our position today is informed by the negotiation we have had with the EU.
    That was "no negotiation with the EU", when the cabinet has spent the last 18 months negotiating only with itself.

    It was an act of manifest incompetence on a massive scale that May was allowed to press the big red start button before she had the slightest fucking idea where she wanted to end up.
    And it has become apparent that the cabinet's Brexiteers had even less of a fucking clue.
  • Options
    currystarcurrystar Posts: 1,171
    DavidL said:

    dixiedean said:

    Sandpit said:

    currystar said:
    The 'well-placed Brussels official' is still only the servant of the European Council in this matter, if that. If the EU takes its leadership from Varadkar - and he's been instrumental in that role so far - then its directions to Barnier might yet change.

    That said, I stand by my comments from my Saturday piece that the Chequers Deal, and the White Paper leading from it, are close to a straw man: it was produced in the full knowledge that Brussels was likely to knock it back. Perhaps they won't, in which case, great. But if they do then the negotiations have nowhere to go.
    With the publication of the White Paper the ball is now in the EU’s court. If they think they can work on a deal from here then great, but if they can’t then we need to agree quickly that that’s the case, so we can spend the next nine months working through the exit strategy to keep planes flying and goods moving around.
    Mmm. Maybe today might have been a good one to think about triggering Article 50. Then we'd have had 2 years to do that?
    Just a thought.
    It was the EU that insisted on "no negotiation without notification". Our position today is informed by the negotiation we have had with the EU.
    That was "no negotiation with the EU", when the cabinet has spent the last 18 months negotiating only with itself.

    It was an act of manifest incompetence on a massive scale that May was allowed to press the big red start button before she had the slightest fucking idea where she wanted to end up.
    Impossible not to agree with that. The Chequers meeting or meetings should have been before the Article 50 notice was served. The White paper today (or more accurately its equivalent) should have been published and debated before the notice was served too. Had it been so we would be in a much better position today and any deal with the EU would have been a lot more palatable. I am pretty disgusted with the way that May has put internal party politics ahead of the national interest on this. It is shameful.

    That said, I accept it is in our interests to have a deal now, even on these terms. We are where we are and where we are is in a shithole with the clock running down and nothing done to create a viable alternative. Shameful.
    I dont think they thought the EU would behave in the way that they have
  • Options
    Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 60,345
    RoyalBlue said:

    dixiedean said:
    Re Airbus - not only are 40,000 jobs at risk but over 120,000 in the supply chain.

    In North Wales it would be as bad, if not worse, then when the pits closed and we all know the anger and violence that caused.

    I am hopeful TM gets a deal, irrespective of the political cost, as there is no other choice but to campaign to remain, and that is a big move in my attitude. I just will not accept a hard Brexit.

    It would devastate our economy here in North Wales and we have nothing to replace it with.

    The Brexiteers account for 25% of my party's MP's so it is upto the 75% to stand up to this UKIP element and form cross party alliances, excluding Corbyn of course, to act in the National interest
    Brexiteers are more like 45% of the parliamentary party, old chum. We are certainly a clear majority of activists and Tory voters.

    The idea that Theresa May can lead a cross-party alliance of BINOers in Parliament is fantasy. Labour will oppose, whatever she brings back.
    The party membership is like Corbyn but instead of hard left are hard right

    There are no more than 80 conservative mps who are in JRM's group which equates to 25%

    But like so many you avoid the consequences and cannot tell me how you replace Airbus
  • Options
    Richard_NabaviRichard_Nabavi Posts: 30,820



    Why would it be no deal? Why wouldn't May concede again and again like she already has?

    She has no space left. She'll be no confidenced if she concedes any significant ground from here. My reading is that a lot of MPs (and cabinet ministers) are prepared to give this a shot as a last offer but won't go further.
    I think you are both being uncharacteristically a bit unreasonable (every negotiation will have some movement and compromise, you can't expect the paper to be adopted entirely without change) and underestimating the capacity of both May and the EU for generating chaff and fudge on an epic scale. I predict there will be a deal, and none of us will be clear what it means, with much left for resolution by subsequent implementing bodies.
    I think you are right on this, especially since the Commission and EU27 governments (including, notably, Ireland), seem to be making some conciliatory noises. No doubt the plan was informally discussed with them (at least I would certainly hope so).

    It's a messy fudge, of course, and I'm sure there will be some fireworks to come, but there absolutely has to be some kind of deal otherwise both sides will be seriously damaged. There's more danger from the UK parliament crashing us out in chaos than from the EU.
  • Options
    TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 41,389

    TOPPING said:

    Sean_F said:

    dixiedean said:
    Re Airbus - not only are 40,000 jobs at risk but over 120,000 in the supply chain.

    In North Wales it would be as bad, if not worse, then when the pits closed and we all know the anger and violence that caused.

    I am hopeful TM gets a deal, irrespective of the political cost, as there is no other choice but to campaign to remain, and that is a big move in my attitude. I just will not accept a hard Brexit.

    It would devastate our economy here in North Wales and we have nothing to replace it with.

    The Brexiteers account for 25% of my party's MP's so it is upto the 75% to stand up to this UKIP element and form cross party alliances, excluding Corbyn of course, to act in the National interest
    If Theresa May cannot get a deal, then I would reluctantly favour a No Deal Brexit.
    You see, Big G? They still want to fuck over you and your family.
    Or they don't believe the Chicken Licken cowardice and doom-mongering.
    Oh I don’t know, Big G doesn’t seem to be a coward or a doom monger. Is that how he appears to you?
  • Options
    NigelbNigelb Posts: 62,762



    Why would it be no deal? Why wouldn't May concede again and again like she already has?

    She has no space left. She'll be no confidenced if she concedes any significant ground from here. My reading is that a lot of MPs (and cabinet ministers) are prepared to give this a shot as a last offer but won't go further.
    I think you are both being uncharacteristically a bit unreasonable (every negotiation will have some movement and compromise, you can't expect the paper to be adopted entirely without change) and underestimating the capacity of both May and the EU for generating chaff and fudge on an epic scale. I predict there will be a deal, and none of us will be clear what it means, with much left for resolution by subsequent implementing bodies.
    I think you are right on this, especially since the Commission and EU27 governments (including, notably, Ireland), seem to be making some conciliatory noises. No doubt the plan was informally discussed with them (at least I would certainly hope so)...
    Barnier not sounding very conciliatory at all now:
    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/jul/12/uks-latest-brexit-plans-likely-to-cross-eu-red-lines-barnier-hints
  • Options
    rpjsrpjs Posts: 3,787
    Sandpit said:

    rpjs said:

    Sandpit said:

    Sandpit said:

    currystar said:
    The 'well-placed Brussels official' is still only the servant of the European Council in this matter, if that. If the EU takes its leadership from Varadkar - and he's been instrumental in that role so far - then its directions to Barnier might yet change.

    That said, I stand by my comments from my Saturday piece that the Chequers Deal, and the White Paper leading from it, are close to a straw man: it was produced in the full knowledge that Brussels was likely to knock it back. Perhaps they won't, in which case, great. But if they do then the negotiations have nowhere to go.
    With the publication of the White Paper the ball is now in the EU’s court. If they think they can work on a deal from here then great, but if they can’t then we need to agree quickly that that’s the case, so we can spend the next nine months working through the exit strategy to keep planes flying and goods moving around.
    It's not in the EU's interests to move quickly on this. It's in the EU's interests to run down the clock to turn the thumbscrews on May and let the panic build.
    Of course it is. Hence my previous suggestion that unless we quickly get a deal/no-deal response, we announce that we are starting to spend the £39bn at £1bn/week until a deal gets done.
    Just throwing money at something isn't necessarily a solution (haven't we heard that line from PB Tories again and again over the years?). For instance, how long will it take to recruit and adequately train the customs officers necessary for a no-deal Brexit next March?
    Throwing money at the problem doesn’t always provide an optimum solution in terms of readiness or value for money, but it’s a hell of a lot better than meekly handing it to the EU as they run the clock down to no deal.
    But they wouldn't get any money in the event of no deal. And ask any waiter/waitress what they they think of those arseholes who put out the maximum amount they're going to tip at the start and deduct bit by bit for any shortcomings in the service: they just assume they're not going to get any tip at all and act accordingly.
  • Options
    CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 59,785
    Nigelb said:

    Good to see that Trump was met by an appropriately high level delegation -
    The US President and First Lady were greeted by International Trade Secretary Liam Fox, the Queen's representative and the chief operating officer of Stansted Airport...

    Standard protocol for a 'working visit' - Tim Stanley managed to wind up some on Twitter with the "insult" of making him land at Stansted - they always land there.....
  • Options
    AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340
    It would be nice if some at least of pb’s Leavers could acknowledge how woefully they misjudged the ease of doing a deal with the EU.

    I won’t hold my breath.
  • Options
    DavidLDavidL Posts: 51,356
    edited July 2018
    @currystar



    Then they are even more stupid than they have allowed themselves to appear. But this isn't really about the EU, intransigent as they have been, this is about us. It is ridiculous that we only now have a cabinet position on what we want with any kind of detail attached to it. It has been a total absence of leadership and governance. It's a disgrace.
  • Options
    rkrkrkrkrkrk Posts: 7,908

    RoyalBlue said:

    dixiedean said:
    Re Airbus - not only are 40,000 jobs at risk but over 120,000 in the supply chain.

    In North Wales it would be as bad, if not worse, then when the pits closed and we all know the anger and violence that caused.

    I am hopeful TM gets a deal, irrespective of the political cost, as there is no other choice but to campaign to remain, and that is a big move in my attitude. I just will not accept a hard Brexit.

    It would devastate our economy here in North Wales and we have nothing to replace it with.

    The Brexiteers account for 25% of my party's MP's so it is upto the 75% to stand up to this UKIP element and form cross party alliances, excluding Corbyn of course, to act in the National interest
    Brexiteers are more like 45% of the parliamentary party, old chum. We are certainly a clear majority of activists and Tory voters.

    The idea that Theresa May can lead a cross-party alliance of BINOers in Parliament is fantasy. Labour will oppose, whatever she brings back.
    The party membership is like Corbyn but instead of hard left are hard right

    There are no more than 80 conservative mps who are in JRM's group which equates to 25%

    But like so many you avoid the consequences and cannot tell me how you replace Airbus
    Err... I think you might be in the wrong party?
    Tory voters overwhelmingly keen on Brexit too, and they were warned by their leader and the PM at the time that stuff like airbus and worse would happen. It didn't put them off then and I don't see why it would put them off now...
  • Options
    Tissue_PriceTissue_Price Posts: 9,039
    edited July 2018
    DavidL said:

    Impossible not to agree with that. The Chequers meeting or meetings should have been before the Article 50 notice was served. The White paper today (or more accurately its equivalent) should have been published and debated before the notice was served too. Had it been so we would be in a much better position today and any deal with the EU would have been a lot more palatable. I am pretty disgusted with the way that May has put internal party politics ahead of the national interest on this. It is shameful.

    That said, I accept it is in our interests to have a deal now, even on these terms. We are where we are and where we are is in a shithole with the clock running down and nothing done to create a viable alternative. Shameful.

    We would be in the same position, only a bit later. The EU would say "no, no, no"; "4 freedoms"; "legal framework" etc. etc. as the clock ran down, because that is in their interest in the negotiations.

    Article 50 was written by the EU to favour the EU and that is exactly how it has worked. The only alternative would have been to go full-on non-cooperation with the EU until they agreed to negotiate, and I don't think TM had the political capital to do that (both domestically and internationally).

    I still think a deal will be done at the last minute, but the stakes [and, more importantly, the possibility of fatal misjudgements] are getting very high now.
  • Options
    SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,927
    India a third of the way to the target from a quarter of their overs, with only a single wicket down. Current price of 1.1 is starting to look like value.
  • Options
    Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 60,345
    edited July 2018
    TOPPING said:

    dixiedean said:
    Re Airbus - not only are 40,000 jobs at risk but over 120,000 in the supply chain.

    In North Wales it would be as bad, if not worse, then when the pits closed and we all know the anger and violence that caused.

    I am hopeful TM gets a deal, irrespective of the political cost, as there is no other choice but to campaign to remain, and that is a big move in my attitude. I just will not accept a hard Brexit.

    It would devastate our economy here in North Wales and we have nothing to replace it with.

    The Brexiteers account for 25% of my party's MP's so it is upto the 75% to stand up to this UKIP element and form cross party alliances, excluding Corbyn of course, to act in the National interest
    Welcome on board Big G. I am sorry to say that this was always where we would end up.

    Can't remember whether you were a Leaver or Remainer but this is no surprise to many of us.
    Voted remain but want to leave to respect democracy as I have said all along.

    However, Boris FO to Airbus has had a huge impact on me and I am not prepared to support anything that threatens my son in law and his colleagues tens of thousands of jobs and the communities that wuld become wastelands if they moved production back to Europe

    It was encouraging that Airbus welcomed TM white paper and that in itself reassures me that TM is consious of business real fears, especially a business like Airbus that needs complete real time access across all their factories

  • Options
    Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 65,826
    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    Sean_F said:

    dixiedean said:
    Re Airbus - not only are 40,000 jobs at risk but over 120,000 in the supply chain.

    In North Wales it would be as bad, if not worse, then when the pits closed and we all know the anger and violence that caused.

    I am hopeful TM gets a deal, irrespective of the political cost, as there is no other choice but to campaign to remain, and that is a big move in my attitude. I just will not accept a hard Brexit.

    It would devastate our economy here in North Wales and we have nothing to replace it with.

    The Brexiteers account for 25% of my party's MP's so it is upto the 75% to stand up to this UKIP element and form cross party alliances, excluding Corbyn of course, to act in the National interest
    If Theresa May cannot get a deal, then I would reluctantly favour a No Deal Brexit.
    You see, Big G? They still want to fuck over you and your family.
    Or they don't believe the Chicken Licken cowardice and doom-mongering.
    Oh I don’t know, Big G doesn’t seem to be a coward or a doom monger. Is that how he appears to you?
    No offence intended but yes. I see no other way to interpret words like "It would devastate our economy here in North Wales and we have nothing to replace it with."
  • Options
    SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,927
    rpjs said:

    Sandpit said:

    rpjs said:

    Sandpit said:

    Sandpit said:

    currystar said:
    The 'well-placed Brussels official' is still only the servant of the European Council in this matter, if that. If the EU takes its leadership from Varadkar - and he's been instrumental in that role so far - then its directions to Barnier might yet change.

    That said, I stand by my comments from my Saturday piece that the Chequers Deal, and the White Paper leading from it, are close to a straw man: it was produced in the full knowledge that Brussels was likely to knock it back. Perhaps they won't, in which case, great. But if they do then the negotiations have nowhere to go.
    With the publication of the White Paper the ball is now in the EU’s court. If they think they can work on a deal from here then great, but if they can’t then we need to agree quickly that that’s the case, so we can spend the next nine months working through the exit strategy to keep planes flying and goods moving around.
    It's not in the EU's interests to move quickly on this. It's in the EU's interests to run down the clock to turn the thumbscrews on May and let the panic build.
    Of course it is. Hence my previous suggestion that unless we quickly get a deal/no-deal response, we announce that we are starting to spend the £39bn at £1bn/week until a deal gets done.
    Just throwing money at something isn't necessarily a solution (haven't we heard that line from PB Tories again and again over the years?). For instance, how long will it take to recruit and adequately train the customs officers necessary for a no-deal Brexit next March?
    Throwing money at the problem doesn’t always provide an optimum solution in terms of readiness or value for money, but it’s a hell of a lot better than meekly handing it to the EU as they run the clock down to no deal.
    But they wouldn't get any money in the event of no deal. And ask any waiter/waitress what they they think of those arseholes who put out the maximum amount they're going to tip at the start and deduct bit by bit for any shortcomings in the service: they just assume they're not going to get any tip at all and act accordingly.
    We will be in a much better position next March if we’ve spent say £20bn on preparing for no deal, than if we got to the same point and it was all still sitting in the bank - but the planes weren’t flying and Dover was at a standstill.
  • Options
    TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 41,389

    DavidL said:

    Impossible not to agree with that. The Chequers meeting or meetings should have been before the Article 50 notice was served. The White paper today (or more accurately its equivalent) should have been published and debated before the notice was served too. Had it been so we would be in a much better position today and any deal with the EU would have been a lot more palatable. I am pretty disgusted with the way that May has put internal party politics ahead of the national interest on this. It is shameful.

    That said, I accept it is in our interests to have a deal now, even on these terms. We are where we are and where we are is in a shithole with the clock running down and nothing done to create a viable alternative. Shameful.

    We would be in the same position, only a bit later. The EU would say "no, no, no"; "4 freedoms"; "legal framework" etc. etc. as the clock ran down, because that is in their interest in the negotiations.

    Article 50 was written by the EU to favour the EU and that is exactly how it has worked. The only alternative would have been to go full-on non-cooperation with the EU until they agreed to negotiate, and I don't think TM had the political capital to do that (both domestically and internationally).

    I still think a deal will be done at the last minute, but the stakes [and, more importantly, the possibility of fatal misjudgements] are getting very high now.
    I would be amazed, although not as much as I once would have been, if the White Paper had not been run by the EU before it was released.
  • Options
    CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 59,785
    Nigelb said:



    Why would it be no deal? Why wouldn't May concede again and again like she already has?

    She has no space left. She'll be no confidenced if she concedes any significant ground from here. My reading is that a lot of MPs (and cabinet ministers) are prepared to give this a shot as a last offer but won't go further.
    I think you are both being uncharacteristically a bit unreasonable (every negotiation will have some movement and compromise, you can't expect the paper to be adopted entirely without change) and underestimating the capacity of both May and the EU for generating chaff and fudge on an epic scale. I predict there will be a deal, and none of us will be clear what it means, with much left for resolution by subsequent implementing bodies.
    I think you are right on this, especially since the Commission and EU27 governments (including, notably, Ireland), seem to be making some conciliatory noises. No doubt the plan was informally discussed with them (at least I would certainly hope so)...
    Barnier not sounding very conciliatory at all now:
    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/jul/12/uks-latest-brexit-plans-likely-to-cross-eu-red-lines-barnier-hints
    In fairness (not something I write often (at all - ed.)) to M. Barnier - if anyone is to change the EU's red lines it can't be him - it has to be the EU27 - he can only negotiate with what they - and the Commission Selmayr have given him.....
  • Options
    DavidLDavidL Posts: 51,356

    DavidL said:

    Impossible not to agree with that. The Chequers meeting or meetings should have been before the Article 50 notice was served. The White paper today (or more accurately its equivalent) should have been published and debated before the notice was served too. Had it been so we would be in a much better position today and any deal with the EU would have been a lot more palatable. I am pretty disgusted with the way that May has put internal party politics ahead of the national interest on this. It is shameful.

    That said, I accept it is in our interests to have a deal now, even on these terms. We are where we are and where we are is in a shithole with the clock running down and nothing done to create a viable alternative. Shameful.

    We would be in the same position, only a bit later. The EU would say "no, no, no"; "4 freedoms"; "legal framework" etc. etc. as the clock ran down, because that is in their interest in the negotiations.

    Article 50 was written by the EU to favour the EU and that is exactly how it has worked. The only alternative would have been to go full-on non-cooperation with the EU until they agreed to negotiate, and I don't think TM had the political capital to do that (both domestically and internationally).

    I still think a deal will be done at the last minute, but the stakes [and, more importantly, the possibility of fatal misjudgements] are getting very high now.
    We have made it easy for them by being unclear what we wanted. We have also failed to prepare for an alternative. May probably should be kept in office until October but in my view she should be impeached for this.
  • Options
    Tissue_PriceTissue_Price Posts: 9,039
    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    Impossible not to agree with that. The Chequers meeting or meetings should have been before the Article 50 notice was served. The White paper today (or more accurately its equivalent) should have been published and debated before the notice was served too. Had it been so we would be in a much better position today and any deal with the EU would have been a lot more palatable. I am pretty disgusted with the way that May has put internal party politics ahead of the national interest on this. It is shameful.

    That said, I accept it is in our interests to have a deal now, even on these terms. We are where we are and where we are is in a shithole with the clock running down and nothing done to create a viable alternative. Shameful.

    We would be in the same position, only a bit later. The EU would say "no, no, no"; "4 freedoms"; "legal framework" etc. etc. as the clock ran down, because that is in their interest in the negotiations.

    Article 50 was written by the EU to favour the EU and that is exactly how it has worked. The only alternative would have been to go full-on non-cooperation with the EU until they agreed to negotiate, and I don't think TM had the political capital to do that (both domestically and internationally).

    I still think a deal will be done at the last minute, but the stakes [and, more importantly, the possibility of fatal misjudgements] are getting very high now.
    We have made it easy for them by being unclear what we wanted. We have also failed to prepare for an alternative. May probably should be kept in office until October but in my view she should be impeached for this.
    Personally I think we were fairly clear about what we wanted (at Florence etc.) They just weren't inclined to give us any of it, because they rightly judged that if they stood firm the ask would come down.
  • Options
    grabcocquegrabcocque Posts: 4,234
    There is blood in the water, and the EU can smell it.

    This is no time for being conciliatory, this is the moment you turn up the heat.
  • Options
    rpjsrpjs Posts: 3,787
    Sandpit said:

    rpjs said:

    Sandpit said:

    rpjs said:

    Sandpit said:

    Sandpit said:


    With the publication of the White Paper the ball is now in the EU’s court. If they think they can work on a deal from here then great, but if they can’t then we need to agree quickly that that’s the case, so we can spend the next nine months working through the exit strategy to keep planes flying and goods moving around.

    It's not in the EU's interests to move quickly on this. It's in the EU's interests to run down the clock to turn the thumbscrews on May and let the panic build.
    Of course it is. Hence my previous suggestion that unless we quickly get a deal/no-deal response, we announce that we are starting to spend the £39bn at £1bn/week until a deal gets done.
    Just throwing money at something isn't necessarily a solution (haven't we heard that line from PB Tories again and again over the years?). For instance, how long will it take to recruit and adequately train the customs officers necessary for a no-deal Brexit next March?
    Throwing money at the problem doesn’t always provide an optimum solution in terms of readiness or value for money, but it’s a hell of a lot better than meekly handing it to the EU as they run the clock down to no deal.
    But they wouldn't get any money in the event of no deal. And ask any waiter/waitress what they they think of those arseholes who put out the maximum amount they're going to tip at the start and deduct bit by bit for any shortcomings in the service: they just assume they're not going to get any tip at all and act accordingly.
    We will be in a much better position next March if we’ve spent say £20bn on preparing for no deal, than if we got to the same point and it was all still sitting in the bank - but the planes weren’t flying and Dover was at a standstill.
    No, you're right that making preparations for no deal is a sensible thing. My points are that it's probably too late now to have very much of a mitigating effect, and to tell the EU that we'd be deducting such spend from the amount we've already agreed with them would pretty much guarantee no deal.
  • Options
    SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,927
    edited July 2018

    It would be nice if some at least of pb’s Leavers could acknowledge how woefully they misjudged the ease of doing a deal with the EU.

    I won’t hold my breath.

    I’ll be the first to admit that I’d expected a negotiation conducted in good faith and in private, rather than one conducted in bad faith and in public, if that counts?
  • Options
    Richard_NabaviRichard_Nabavi Posts: 30,820
    edited July 2018
    Sandpit said:

    We will be in a much better position next March if we’ve spent say £20bn on preparing for no deal, than if we got to the same point and it was all still sitting in the bank - but the planes weren’t flying and Dover was at a standstill.

    The problem is that the most intractable and dangerous problems of 'no deal' (i.e. literally no deal, not the hypothetical alternative of agreeing a deal with the EU which gets us amicably to WTO terms) are ones which can't handled unilaterally. Nothing the UK can do on its own will force an Open Skies agreement, make the airworthiness of Airbus wings internationally accepted, allow goods to travel across the channel without disruption, or sort out the legal status of trillions of dollars of cross-border derivative contracts which were written under EU-wide financial regulation.
  • Options
    grabcocquegrabcocque Posts: 4,234
    Sandpit said:

    It would be nice if some at least of pb’s Leavers could acknowledge how woefully they misjudged the ease of doing a deal with the EU.

    I won’t hold my breath.

    I’ll be the first to admit that I’d expected a negotiation make in good faith and conducted in private, rather than one conducted in bad faith and in public, if that counts?
    That's not how things are done.
  • Options
    kle4kle4 Posts: 91,941
    Am I seeing it right that Guido Fawkes has a clip of Trump commenting upon Brexit, and Guido is pleased about it? Seems a bit hypocritical given it would be an intervention from a US president, which have not always been welcomed.
  • Options
    DavidLDavidL Posts: 51,356

    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    Impossible not to agree with that. The Chequers meeting or meetings should have been before the Article 50 notice was served. The White paper today (or more accurately its equivalent) should have been published and debated before the notice was served too. Had it been so we would be in a much better position today and any deal with the EU would have been a lot more palatable. I am pretty disgusted with the way that May has put internal party politics ahead of the national interest on this. It is shameful.

    That said, I accept it is in our interests to have a deal now, even on these terms. We are where we are and where we are is in a shithole with the clock running down and nothing done to create a viable alternative. Shameful.

    We would be in the same position, only a bit later. The EU would say "no, no, no"; "4 freedoms"; "legal framework" etc. etc. as the clock ran down, because that is in their interest in the negotiations.

    Article 50 was written by the EU to favour the EU and that is exactly how it has worked. The only alternative would have been to go full-on non-cooperation with the EU until they agreed to negotiate, and I don't think TM had the political capital to do that (both domestically and internationally).

    I still think a deal will be done at the last minute, but the stakes [and, more importantly, the possibility of fatal misjudgements] are getting very high now.
    We have made it easy for them by being unclear what we wanted. We have also failed to prepare for an alIternative. May probably should be kept in office until October but in my view she should be impeached for this.
    Personally I think we were fairly clear about what we wanted (at Florence etc.) They just weren't inclined to give us any of it, because they rightly judged that if they stood firm the ask would come down.
    Florence was broad strokes but you only have to look at @Toppings helpful summary of the White Paper downthread to see that this is an entirely different level of detail. The EU may well have said no but then we would have been under no illusions about what needed to be done. Instead HMG did nothing, nothing at all.

    I'm not pleased.
  • Options
    Richard_NabaviRichard_Nabavi Posts: 30,820

    Personally I think we were fairly clear about what we wanted (at Florence etc.) They just weren't inclined to give us any of it, because they rightly judged that if they stood firm the ask would come down.

    Yes, Theresa May was very clear.
  • Options
    Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 60,997
    Mr. Cocque, the Caudine Forks springs to mind.
  • Options
    kle4kle4 Posts: 91,941
    edited July 2018
    Sandpit said:

    It would be nice if some at least of pb’s Leavers could acknowledge how woefully they misjudged the ease of doing a deal with the EU.

    I won’t hold my breath.

    I’ll be the first to admit that I’d expected a negotiation conducted in good faith and in private, rather than one conducted in bad faith and in public, if that counts?
    Plenty of people have acknowledged it has been harder to do a deal than expected/hoped, he is just lying about nobody having done so. It's such a blatant lie I don't know why he keeps doing it.
  • Options
    dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 27,995
    ERG increasingly seem like.

    "It can't be reasoned with, it can't be bargained with. It doesn't feel pity or remorse or fear and it absolutely will not stop. Ever."
  • Options
    Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 65,826
    dixiedean said:

    ERG increasingly seem like.

    "It can't be reasoned with, it can't be bargained with. It doesn't feel pity or remorse or fear and it absolutely will not stop. Ever."

    Birds of a feather.

    EU increasingly seem like.

    "It can't be reasoned with, it can't be bargained with. It doesn't feel pity or remorse or fear and it absolutely will not stop. Ever."
  • Options
    grabcocquegrabcocque Posts: 4,234
    So at the last moment, and after a marathon 48 hour negotiation session, May betrays her party and gets her fudge cake BRINO deal by rebranding the four freedoms, ECJ, single market and customs union as something everso slightly different.

    She brings it to Parliament. Labour and the Mogglodytes vote it down.

    That's where we're headed.
  • Options
    AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340
    Sandpit said:

    It would be nice if some at least of pb’s Leavers could acknowledge how woefully they misjudged the ease of doing a deal with the EU.

    I won’t hold my breath.

    I’ll be the first to admit that I’d expected a negotiation conducted in good faith and in private, rather than one conducted in bad faith and in public, if that counts?
    The EU is not negotiating in bad faith. It is using its strength to get what it wants, as was obvious it would before the referendum. It turns out we don’t hold all the cards.
  • Options
    Tissue_PriceTissue_Price Posts: 9,039
    edited July 2018

    So at the last moment, and after a marathon 48 hour negotiation session, May betrays her party and gets her fudge cake BRINO deal by rebranding the four freedoms, ECJ, single market and customs union as something everso slightly different.

    She brings it to Parliament. Labour and the Mogglodytes vote it down.

    That's where we're headed.

    I'm not sure Labour's MPs will.

    (EDIT: In any case, the fear that such a weak deal would be voted down ought to encourage the EU to give us a better deal.)
  • Options
    AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340
    kle4 said:

    Sandpit said:

    It would be nice if some at least of pb’s Leavers could acknowledge how woefully they misjudged the ease of doing a deal with the EU.

    I won’t hold my breath.

    I’ll be the first to admit that I’d expected a negotiation conducted in good faith and in private, rather than one conducted in bad faith and in public, if that counts?
    Plenty of people have acknowledged it has been harder to do a deal than expected/hoped, he is just lying about nobody having done so. It's such a blatant lie I don't know why he keeps doing it.
    You must be reading a different pb from me. Most pb Leavers are very free with their aspersions about the EU in this process but oddly reticent to talk about how they had envisaged the disengagement to be concluded in an afternoon over tea and crumpets.
  • Options
    SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,927

    Sandpit said:

    We will be in a much better position next March if we’ve spent say £20bn on preparing for no deal, than if we got to the same point and it was all still sitting in the bank - but the planes weren’t flying and Dover was at a standstill.

    The problem is that the most intractable and dangerous problems of 'no deal' (i.e. literally no deal, not the hypothetical alternative of agreeing a deal with the EU which gets us amicably to WTO terms) are ones which can't handled unilaterally. Nothing the UK can do on its own will force an Open Skies agreement, make the airworthiness of Airbus wings internationally accepted, allow goods to travel across the channel without disruption, or sort out the legal status of trillions of dollars of cross-border derivative contracts which were written under EU-wide financial regulation.
    Pretty much agreed. Things like aircraft type certifications could be sorted via ICAO and the UN, but open skies and the like would indeed need to be discussed with the EU.

    The idea that the EU would ground every Airbus, every plane with RR engines and every British pilot on Brexit day - and refuse to discuss the subject between now and then - would almost certainly be illegal under international law.
  • Options
    Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 60,345
    rkrkrk said:

    RoyalBlue said:

    dixiedean said:
    Re Airbus - not only are 40,000 jobs at risk but over 120,000 in the supply chain.

    In North Wales it would be as bad, if not worse, then when the pits closed and we all know the anger and violence that caused.

    I am hopeful TM gets a deal, irrespective of the political cost, as there is no other choice but to campaign to remain, and that is a big move in my attitude. I just will not accept a hard Brexit.

    It would devastate our economy here in North Wales and we have nothing to replace it with.

    The Brexiteers account for 25% of my party's MP's so it is upto the 75% to stand up to this UKIP element and form cross party alliances, excluding Corbyn of course, to act in the National interest
    Brexiteers are more like 45% of the parliamentary party, old chum. We are certainly a clear majority of activists and Tory voters.

    The idea that Theresa May can lead a cross-party alliance of BINOers in Parliament is fantasy. Labour will oppose, whatever she brings back.
    The party membership is like Corbyn but instead of hard left are hard right

    There are no more than 80 conservative mps who are in JRM's group which equates to 25%

    But like so many you avoid the consequences and cannot tell me how you replace Airbus
    Err... I think you might be in the wrong party?
    Tory voters overwhelmingly keen on Brexit too, and they were warned by their leader and the PM at the time that stuff like airbus and worse would happen. It didn't put them off then and I don't see why it would put them off now...
    No I am not and will remain loyal but fight for sanity
  • Options
    TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 41,389

    So at the last moment, and after a marathon 48 hour negotiation session, May betrays her party and gets her fudge cake BRINO deal by rebranding the four freedoms, ECJ, single market and customs union as something everso slightly different.

    She brings it to Parliament. Labour and the Mogglodytes vote it down.

    That's where we're headed.

    As I noted upthread, the Governing Body looks a lot like the EU.
  • Options
    rkrkrkrkrkrk Posts: 7,908

    rkrkrk said:

    RoyalBlue said:

    dixiedean said:
    Re Airbus - not only are 40,000 jobs at risk but over 120,000 in the supply chain.

    In North Wales it would be as bad, if not worse, then when the pits closed and we all know the anger and violence that caused.

    I am hopeful TM gets a deal, irrespective of the political cost, as there is no other choice but to campaign to remain, and that is a big move in my attitude. I just will not accept a hard Brexit.

    It would devastate our economy here in North Wales and we have nothing to replace it with.

    The Brexiteers account for 25% of my party's MP's so it is upto the 75% to stand up to this UKIP element and form cross party alliances, excluding Corbyn of course, to act in the National interest
    Brexiteers are more like 45% of the parliamentary party, old chum. We are certainly a clear majority of activists and Tory voters.

    The idea that Theresa May can lead a cross-party alliance of BINOers in Parliament is fantasy. Labour will oppose, whatever she brings back.
    The party membership is like Corbyn but instead of hard left are hard right

    There are no more than 80 conservative mps who are in JRM's group which equates to 25%

    But like so many you avoid the consequences and cannot tell me how you replace Airbus
    Err... I think you might be in the wrong party?
    Tory voters overwhelmingly keen on Brexit too, and they were warned by their leader and the PM at the time that stuff like airbus and worse would happen. It didn't put them off then and I don't see why it would put them off now...
    No I am not and will remain loyal but fight for sanity
    Well best of luck!
    The country will certainly benefit from a better conservative party.
  • Options
    Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 60,345

    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    Sean_F said:

    dixiedean said:
    Re Airbus - not only are 40,000 jobs at risk but over 120,000 in the supply chain.

    In North Wales it would be as bad, if not worse, then when the pits closed and we all know the anger and violence that caused.

    I am hopeful TM gets a deal, irrespective of the political cost, as there is no other choice but to campaign to remain, and that is a big move in my attitude. I just will not accept a hard Brexit.

    It would devastate our economy here in North Wales and we have nothing to replace it with.

    The Brexiteers account for 25% of my party's MP's so it is upto the 75% to stand up to this UKIP element and form cross party alliances, excluding Corbyn of course, to act in the National interest
    If Theresa May cannot get a deal, then I would reluctantly favour a No Deal Brexit.
    You see, Big G? They still want to fuck over you and your family.
    Or they don't believe the Chicken Licken cowardice and doom-mongering.
    Oh I don’t know, Big G doesn’t seem to be a coward or a doom monger. Is that how he appears to you?
    No offence intended but yes. I see no other way to interpret words like "It would devastate our economy here in North Wales and we have nothing to replace it with."
    Polite question - how would you replace the high skill high paid jobs at Airbus.

    Not one Brexiteer had offered an explanation as there is not one
  • Options
    williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 48,114

    So at the last moment, and after a marathon 48 hour negotiation session, May betrays her party and gets her fudge cake BRINO deal by rebranding the four freedoms, ECJ, single market and customs union as something everso slightly different.

    She brings it to Parliament. Labour and the Mogglodytes vote it down.

    That's where we're headed.

    If she knows it will get voted down, why bring it to parliament? Her judo move is to come back to London, walk out of Number 10 and announce that we have the best deal possible that respects the referendum result (see Michael Gove for details) and now we're going to give the people the final say between Brexit and Remain.
  • Options
    NigelbNigelb Posts: 62,762

    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    Sean_F said:

    dixiedean said:
    Re Airbus - not only are 40,000 jobs at risk but over 120,000 in the supply chain.

    In North Wales it would be as bad, if not worse, then when the pits closed and we all know the anger and violence that caused.

    I am hopeful TM gets a deal, irrespective of the political cost, as there is no other choice but to campaign to remain, and that is a big move in my attitude. I just will not accept a hard Brexit.

    It would devastate our economy here in North Wales and we have nothing to replace it with.

    The Brexiteers account for 25% of my party's MP's so it is upto the 75% to stand up to this UKIP element and form cross party alliances, excluding Corbyn of course, to act in the National interest
    If Theresa May cannot get a deal, then I would reluctantly favour a No Deal Brexit.
    You see, Big G? They still want to fuck over you and your family.
    Or they don't believe the Chicken Licken cowardice and doom-mongering.
    Oh I don’t know, Big G doesn’t seem to be a coward or a doom monger. Is that how he appears to you?
    No offence intended but yes. I see no other way to interpret words like "It would devastate our economy here in North Wales and we have nothing to replace it with."
    Well there might also be 'realist'.
    If we are determined to go ad hominem, I'm sure I could come up with a couple of disobliging terms for you too...
  • Options
    SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,927
    edited July 2018

    Sandpit said:

    It would be nice if some at least of pb’s Leavers could acknowledge how woefully they misjudged the ease of doing a deal with the EU.

    I won’t hold my breath.

    I’ll be the first to admit that I’d expected a negotiation conducted in good faith and in private, rather than one conducted in bad faith and in public, if that counts?
    The EU is not negotiating in bad faith. It is using its strength to get what it wants, as was obvious it would before the referendum. It turns out we don’t hold all the cards.
    I think that making threats about grounding planes isn’t negotiating in good faith. More seriously the threats about the Northern Ireland border are in incredibly bad faith, unless you believe that the EU would actually build a fence and customs posts across Ireland?

    The EU have deliberately chosen an adversarial rather than a co-operative negotiation process.
  • Options
    GIN1138GIN1138 Posts: 20,874
    edited July 2018

    So at the last moment, and after a marathon 48 hour negotiation session, May betrays her party and gets her fudge cake BRINO deal by rebranding the four freedoms, ECJ, single market and customs union as something everso slightly different.

    She brings it to Parliament. Labour and the Mogglodytes vote it down.

    That's where we're headed.

    If she knows it will get voted down, why bring it to parliament? Her judo move is to come back to London, walk out of Number 10 and announce that we have the best deal possible that respects the referendum result (see Michael Gove for details) and now we're going to give the people the final say between Brexit and Remain.
    She would have to legislate to have a referendum... And there is no majority in parliament for that (not to mention it would have go through the Lords, we'd have weeks of debate over the wording of the referendum and there would probably be legal challenges...)
  • Options
    grabcocquegrabcocque Posts: 4,234
    Sandpit said:


    I think that making threats about grounding planes isn’t negotiating in good faith. More seriously the threats about the Northern Ireland border are in incredibly bad faith, unless you believe that the EU would actually build a fence and customs posts across Ireland?

    The EU isn't making any such threats stop being silly.

    For a start it doesn't have to. Business has a very active imagination when it comes to worst case scenarios, as we are finding out.
  • Options
    grabcocquegrabcocque Posts: 4,234
    Sandpit said:

    Sandpit said:

    It would be nice if some at least of pb’s Leavers could acknowledge how woefully they misjudged the ease of doing a deal with the EU.

    I won’t hold my breath.

    I’ll be the first to admit that I’d expected a negotiation conducted in good faith and in private, rather than one conducted in bad faith and in public, if that counts?
    The EU is not negotiating in bad faith. It is using its strength to get what it wants, as was obvious it would before the referendum. It turns out we don’t hold all the cards.
    I think that making threats about grounding planes isn’t negotiating in good faith. More seriously the threats about the Northern Ireland border are in incredibly bad faith, unless you believe that the EU would actually build a fence and customs posts across Ireland?

    The EU have deliberately chosen an adversarial rather than a co-operative negotiation process.
    It's amazing in hindsight how *sure* Brexiteers were that we could divide and conquer ourselves to an unlimited supply of cake.

    It's just NOT CRICKET the way the EU27 is defending its own interests.
  • Options
    AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340
    Sandpit said:

    Sandpit said:

    It would be nice if some at least of pb’s Leavers could acknowledge how woefully they misjudged the ease of doing a deal with the EU.

    I won’t hold my breath.

    I’ll be the first to admit that I’d expected a negotiation conducted in good faith and in private, rather than one conducted in bad faith and in public, if that counts?
    The EU is not negotiating in bad faith. It is using its strength to get what it wants, as was obvious it would before the referendum. It turns out we don’t hold all the cards.
    I think that making threats about grounding planes isn’t negotiating in good faith. More seriously the threats about the Northern Ireland border are in incredibly bad faith, unless you believe that the EU will actually build a fence and customs posts across Ireland?
    The EU wants to see Northern Ireland resolved in a manner consistent with the Good Friday Agreement, as should Britain. Brexiteers have blustered but rely on fantasy technology to ignore the problem. That is bad faith.

    The EU’s touted solution is unacceptable, seeking to put a wedge within a sovereign territory, I grant you. As it happens, the December agreement included favourable wording for Britain getting to a true soft Brexit but Theresa May doesn’t have the authority first to face down the ERG and then to confront M Barnier with the words the EU signed up to. A pity.
  • Options
    SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,927

    Sandpit said:


    I think that making threats about grounding planes isn’t negotiating in good faith. More seriously the threats about the Northern Ireland border are in incredibly bad faith, unless you believe that the EU would actually build a fence and customs posts across Ireland?

    The EU isn't making any such threats stop being silly.

    For a start it doesn't have to. Business has a very active imagination when it comes to worst case scenarios, as we are finding out.
    Link to the actual EU document on aviation.
    https://ec.europa.eu/transport/sites/transport/files/legislation/brexit-notice-to-stakeholders-aviation-safety.pdf

    With effect from 29/3/19:

    They are saying that British built planes or planes containing British certified parts will no longer be legally airworthy, neither will any British registered planes.

    They are further saying that British licensed professionals such as pilots, engineers, dispatchers, air traffic controllers etc. will have their licences invalidated.

    These licences and certifications have worldwide effect.

    There is also the matter of trade agreements such as Open Skies.
  • Options
    grabcocquegrabcocque Posts: 4,234
    edited July 2018
    Sandpit said:

    They are saying that British built planes or planes containing British certified parts will no longer be legally airworthy, neither will any British registered planes.

    They are further saying that British licensed professionals such as pilots, engineers, dispatchers, air traffic controllers etc. will have their licences invalidated.

    These are not threats. These are simple statements of legal fact.
  • Options
    SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,927

    Sandpit said:

    Sandpit said:


    I think that making threats about grounding planes isn’t negotiating in good faith. More seriously the threats about the Northern Ireland border are in incredibly bad faith, unless you believe that the EU would actually build a fence and customs posts across Ireland?

    The EU isn't making any such threats stop being silly.

    For a start it doesn't have to. Business has a very active imagination when it comes to worst case scenarios, as we are finding out.
    Link to the actual EU document on aviation.
    https://ec.europa.eu/transport/sites/transport/files/legislation/brexit-notice-to-stakeholders-aviation-safety.pdf

    With effect from 29/3/19:

    They are saying that British built planes or planes containing British certified parts will no longer be legally airworthy, neither will any British registered planes.

    They are further saying that British licensed professionals such as pilots, engineers, dispatchers, air traffic controllers etc. will have their licences invalidated.

    These licences and certifications have worldwide effect.

    There is also the matter of trade agreements such as Open Skies.
    These are not threats. These are simple statements of legal fact.
    When they are refusing to talk about these issues then they become threats.
  • Options
    Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 60,345

    Sandpit said:


    I think that making threats about grounding planes isn’t negotiating in good faith. More seriously the threats about the Northern Ireland border are in incredibly bad faith, unless you believe that the EU would actually build a fence and customs posts across Ireland?

    The EU isn't making any such threats stop being silly.

    For a start it doesn't have to. Business has a very active imagination when it comes to worst case scenarios, as we are finding out.
    Can someone explain to me how the Brexiteers will secure Airbus in the UK on a hard Brexit

    Not one Brexiteer has answered the question other than say it is a scare story.

    Come on Brexiteers now is your chance to lay out how you guarantee these jobs
  • Options
    grabcocquegrabcocque Posts: 4,234
    Sandpit said:


    When they are refusing to talk about these issues then they become threats.

    If they're refusing to talk about these issues then why is aviation in the Chequers agreement?
  • Options
    SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,927

    Sandpit said:

    Sandpit said:

    It would be nice if some at least of pb’s Leavers could acknowledge how woefully they misjudged the ease of doing a deal with the EU.

    I won’t hold my breath.

    I’ll be the first to admit that I’d expected a negotiation conducted in good faith and in private, rather than one conducted in bad faith and in public, if that counts?
    The EU is not negotiating in bad faith. It is using its strength to get what it wants, as was obvious it would before the referendum. It turns out we don’t hold all the cards.
    I think that making threats about grounding planes isn’t negotiating in good faith. More seriously the threats about the Northern Ireland border are in incredibly bad faith, unless you believe that the EU will actually build a fence and customs posts across Ireland?
    The EU wants to see Northern Ireland resolved in a manner consistent with the Good Friday Agreement, as should Britain. Brexiteers have blustered but rely on fantasy technology to ignore the problem. That is bad faith.

    The EU’s touted solution is unacceptable, seeking to put a wedge within a sovereign territory, I grant you. As it happens, the December agreement included favourable wording for Britain getting to a true soft Brexit but Theresa May doesn’t have the authority first to face down the ERG and then to confront M Barnier with the words the EU signed up to. A pity.
    I am sure that the U.K. wishes to see a solution to the NI border consistent with the GFA too, as with aviation these things need to be worked though in a co-operative manner rather than used as pawns in the negotiation process. Barnier re-interpreted the text of the December agreement after the fact, in order to try and separate NI from GB.
  • Options
    SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,927

    Sandpit said:


    When they are refusing to talk about these issues then they become threats.

    If they're refusing to talk about these issues then why is aviation in the Chequers agreement?
    The Chequers document is us talking. Their document on aviation I already linked upthread.
  • Options
    SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,927
    Sandpit said:

    India a third of the way to the target from a quarter of their overs, with only a single wicket down. Current price of 1.1 is starting to look like value.

    1.02 now. :D
  • Options
    grabcocquegrabcocque Posts: 4,234
    Sandpit said:


    I am sure that the U.K. wishes to see a solution to the NI border consistent with the GFA too, as with aviation these things need to be worked though in a co-operative manner rather than used as pawns in the negotiation process. Barnier re-interpreted the text of the December agreement after the fact, in order to try and separate NI from GB.

    He did that because he knew it would piss the DUP off.
  • Options
    CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 59,785
    Sandpit said:

    Sandpit said:


    I think that making threats about grounding planes isn’t negotiating in good faith. More seriously the threats about the Northern Ireland border are in incredibly bad faith, unless you believe that the EU would actually build a fence and customs posts across Ireland?

    The EU isn't making any such threats stop being silly.

    For a start it doesn't have to. Business has a very active imagination when it comes to worst case scenarios, as we are finding out.
    Link to the actual EU document on aviation.
    https://ec.europa.eu/transport/sites/transport/files/legislation/brexit-notice-to-stakeholders-aviation-safety.pdf

    With effect from 29/3/19:

    They are saying that British built planes or planes containing British certified parts will no longer be legally airworthy, neither will any British registered planes.
    Given there are British parts in both Boeing and Airbus, they plan to ground the entire global aviation industry (bar North Korea)?
  • Options
    blueblueblueblue Posts: 875
    GIN1138 said:

    Scott_P said:
    So I guess Theresa Griffin's solution would be to remain... Oh and just as a nice little Brucie Bonus she'd keep her place on the gravy train too no doubt? :D
    I'm confused - are you saying you disagree with the economic impact of the various Brexit options, or you just don't care about them?
  • Options
    Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 60,345
    blueblue said:

    GIN1138 said:

    Scott_P said:
    So I guess Theresa Griffin's solution would be to remain... Oh and just as a nice little Brucie Bonus she'd keep her place on the gravy train too no doubt? :D
    I'm confused - are you saying you disagree with the economic impact of the various Brexit options, or you just don't care about them?
    Come on Gin - tell me your plan for Airbus in North Wales from March 2019 in a hard Brexit case

    Scare story and it will be OK do not qualify
  • Options
    CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 59,785

    Sandpit said:


    I think that making threats about grounding planes isn’t negotiating in good faith. More seriously the threats about the Northern Ireland border are in incredibly bad faith, unless you believe that the EU would actually build a fence and customs posts across Ireland?

    The EU isn't making any such threats stop being silly.

    For a start it doesn't have to. Business has a very active imagination when it comes to worst case scenarios, as we are finding out.
    Can someone explain to me how the Brexiteers will secure Airbus in the UK on a hard Brexit

    Not one Brexiteer has answered the question other than say it is a scare story.

    Come on Brexiteers now is your chance to lay out how you guarantee these jobs
    Not a Brexiteer, but I’m guessing Airbus won’t want to stop production for the 4-5 years it’s going to take to replace the wings coming from the U.K....so I guess something will be worked out.

    We only ever hear the “British catastrophe” side of the no-deal story - like yesterday’s “generators for Northern Ireland” - if the Republic refused to supply the North with electricity, how long do you think the lorry queues at Holyhead would be?
  • Options
    Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 60,345

    Sandpit said:


    I think that making threats about grounding planes isn’t negotiating in good faith. More seriously the threats about the Northern Ireland border are in incredibly bad faith, unless you believe that the EU would actually build a fence and customs posts across Ireland?

    The EU isn't making any such threats stop being silly.

    For a start it doesn't have to. Business has a very active imagination when it comes to worst case scenarios, as we are finding out.
    Can someone explain to me how the Brexiteers will secure Airbus in the UK on a hard Brexit

    Not one Brexiteer has answered the question other than say it is a scare story.

    Come on Brexiteers now is your chance to lay out how you guarantee these jobs
    Not a Brexiteer, but I’m guessing Airbus won’t want to stop production for the 4-5 years it’s going to take to replace the wings coming from the U.K....so I guess something will be worked out.

    We only ever hear the “British catastrophe” side of the no-deal story - like yesterday’s “generators for Northern Ireland” - if the Republic refused to supply the North with electricity, how long do you think the lorry queues at Holyhead would be?
    The real threat is for the new generation of wings
  • Options
    AnorakAnorak Posts: 6,621

    Sandpit said:


    When they are refusing to talk about these issues then they become threats.

    If they're refusing to talk about these issues then why is aviation in the Chequers agreement?
    Not threats, I don't think. I view that as a frustrated official screaming at everyone that this needs *sorting out* regardless of the flavour of Brexit. It's one issue that all sides would be massively hit by, and one that no-one loses out from a quiet and straightforward resolution. It also goes nowhere near any of the EUs red lines (that I can see).

    Of all the issues to resolve and untangle, this is one of the ones I'm least worried about.
  • Options
    RoyalBlueRoyalBlue Posts: 3,223
    edited July 2018

    RoyalBlue said:

    dixiedean said:
    Re Airbus - not only are 40,000 jobs at risk but over 120,000 in the supply chain.

    In North Wales it would be as bad, if not worse, then when the pits closed and we all know the anger and violence that caused.

    I am hopeful TM gets a deal, irrespective of the political cost, as there is no other choice but to campaign to remain, and that is a big move in my attitude. I just will not accept a hard Brexit.

    It would devastate our economy here in North Wales and we have nothing to replace it with.

    The Brexiteers account for 25% of my party's MP's so it is upto the 75% to stand up to this UKIP element and form cross party alliances, excluding Corbyn of course, to act in the National interest
    Brexiteers are more like 45% of the parliamentary party, old chum. We are certainly a clear majority of activists and Tory voters.

    The idea that Theresa May can lead a cross-party alliance of BINOers in Parliament is fantasy. Labour will oppose, whatever she brings back.
    The party membership is like Corbyn but instead of hard left are hard right

    There are no more than 80 conservative mps who are in JRM's group which equates to 25%

    But like so many you avoid the consequences and cannot tell me how you replace Airbus
    If you think most Tory members are hard right, you don’t know what that term means.

    Your Airbus hysteria is also getting increasingly ridiculous. British participation in the consortium predates our membership of the EEC. You seem to forget that if the EU makes it impossible for Airbus’ UK operations to play their part in production, they can’t make any planes. If they can’t make any planes, the greatest symbol of Europe’s industrial prowess goes broke. I don’t think the EU wants that.

    In a hard Brexit scenario, I would expect that the resulting sharp devaluation of sterling would make Airbus’ U.K. operations competitive, even with customs and regulatory snafus. Your son in law and the rest of us might cut have to cut back on imported BMWs or foreign holidays for a period, but high unemployment is very unlikely.
  • Options
    AnorakAnorak Posts: 6,621
    edited July 2018

    blueblue said:

    GIN1138 said:

    Scott_P said:
    So I guess Theresa Griffin's solution would be to remain... Oh and just as a nice little Brucie Bonus she'd keep her place on the gravy train too no doubt? :D
    I'm confused - are you saying you disagree with the economic impact of the various Brexit options, or you just don't care about them?
    Come on Gin - tell me your plan for Airbus in North Wales from March 2019 in a hard Brexit case

    Scare story and it will be OK do not qualify
    You're talking to someone who would rather switch from Tory to Corbyn than give any sort of compromise to the EUSSR. I don't think he gives a monkeys about anyone's livelihood or future if it gets in the way of a blue passport.
  • Options
    DavidLDavidL Posts: 51,356

    Sandpit said:


    I think that making threats about grounding planes isn’t negotiating in good faith. More seriously the threats about the Northern Ireland border are in incredibly bad faith, unless you believe that the EU would actually build a fence and customs posts across Ireland?

    The EU isn't making any such threats stop being silly.

    For a start it doesn't have to. Business has a very active imagination when it comes to worst case scenarios, as we are finding out.
    Can someone explain to me how the Brexiteers will secure Airbus in the UK on a hard Brexit

    Not one Brexiteer has answered the question other than say it is a scare story.

    Come on Brexiteers now is your chance to lay out how you guarantee these jobs
    Airbus is a large and complex business involving high value products and high margins. A hard Brexit might result in tariffs if we chose to impose them on imports. I don’t think we would. It might result i. Tariffs on exports. That is up to the EU but it seems unlikely to me. If they did we would need to compensate them for the costs of the tariffs and any extra administration.

    Going forward we would need to incentivise Airbus to keep investing in the U.K. in a hard Brexit world where we have no agreement with the EU about State aid none of that would be too difficult or too expensive.

    Airbus would not be able to replace U.K. wings for years. It either finds ways to certify them or goes out of business.

    This is not optional. A sensible deal is optimal. But I do not believe that those jobs would be lost.
  • Options
    NorthofStokeNorthofStoke Posts: 1,758
    I think that there is a a very narrow path that represents a reasonable compromise and the current government proposal is in the middle of it. There is a little room for adjustment but not much. Outside of the path on one side is a high risk of serious short-term economic damage and on the other a blatant disregard for the majority vote in the referendum. Every politician and political grouping will be forced to make a choice. Labour are under as much pressure as the Tories. If they shoot down the compromise to try and force an election without a clear difference that could back fire very badly if it is perceived as opportunism. If they insist on a softer Brexit then it really would be no Brexit at all and would be seen as undermining the negotiations and they would lose votes in the Midlands, if they insist on a harder Brexit (as Corbyn would like) they would lose a great body of current support. Will party lines even hold to any degree when the crunch votes take place?
  • Options
    CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 59,785

    Sandpit said:


    I think that making threats about grounding planes isn’t negotiating in good faith. More seriously the threats about the Northern Ireland border are in incredibly bad faith, unless you believe that the EU would actually build a fence and customs posts across Ireland?

    The EU isn't making any such threats stop being silly.

    For a start it doesn't have to. Business has a very active imagination when it comes to worst case scenarios, as we are finding out.
    Can someone explain to me how the Brexiteers will secure Airbus in the UK on a hard Brexit

    Not one Brexiteer has answered the question other than say it is a scare story.

    Come on Brexiteers now is your chance to lay out how you guarantee these jobs
    Not a Brexiteer, but I’m guessing Airbus won’t want to stop production for the 4-5 years it’s going to take to replace the wings coming from the U.K....so I guess something will be worked out.

    We only ever hear the “British catastrophe” side of the no-deal story - like yesterday’s “generators for Northern Ireland” - if the Republic refused to supply the North with electricity, how long do you think the lorry queues at Holyhead would be?
    The real threat is for the new generation of wings
    The expertise is in the U.K. - but apparently the EU is going to ground all planes with British parts in them (which is virtually all of them). The recent Airbus “threat” was to move wing production to.....France. Germany. Italy. Spain. The USA or China.
This discussion has been closed.