I see we have got diverted into boys toys again. Mike’s piece is important. It suggests that for all the hysteria of yesterday the market doesn’t think that the probabilities have changed at all. This strongly supports @Nick’s analysis that this is a part of the way that the EU does business.
What I think is different is the genuine anger on the part of May yesterday. She may well make a Brexiteer yet.
May has no choice politically now but to make a very hard, defiant and combative anti-EU speech. In public.
Time to fight back.
Yes, why not take self-harm to the logical extreme?
She’s just been publicly humiliated and insulted. She has no choice.
You just don’t get the politics of this. No British Prime Minister can tolerate treatment like that and it’s astonishing so many Remainers on here (and elsewhere) are cheering them on, though not all I hasten to add, and I can’t say I’m surprised to see it either although I am disappointed.
I would tolerate all the risks of no deal, including economic disruption, Corbyn and even eventual rejoining, over abject national humiliation just so they can make an example of the UK. Because all of that would be our choice, not theirs.
A lot of others will feel likewise.
I see little cheering. National humiliation was always going to be one consequence of Brexit. We voted to make ourselves more irrelevant, less influential and worse off.
Nah, National humiliation by foreign powers (in this case, the EU) is a choice they’ve decided to make because they want to make an example of the UK and publicly bring it to heel.
We don’t have to (and shouldn’t) choose that. We should choose self-respect and walk away.
Yes, it will be hard. The alternatives are worse.
That’s very easy to say, but it doesn’t put bread on the table. No-one is making an example of the UK. We have a politically inept Prime Minister trying to secure a deal she made impossible because of the red lines she drew in order to curry favour with the Tory right. This is an entirely self-inflicted wound.
I see we have got diverted into boys toys again. Mike’s piece is important. It suggests that for all the hysteria of yesterday the market doesn’t think that the probabilities have changed at all. This strongly supports @Nick’s analysis that this is a part of the way that the EU does business.
What I think is different is the genuine anger on the part of May yesterday. She may well make a Brexiteer yet.
May has no choice politically now but to make a very hard, defiant and combative anti-EU speech. In public.
Time to fight back.
Yes, why not take self-harm to the logical extreme?
She’s just been publicly humiliated and insulted. She has no choice.
You just don’t get the politics of this. No British Prime Minister can tolerate treatment like that and it’s astonishing so many Remainers on here (and elsewhere) are cheering them on, though not all I hasten to add, and I can’t say I’m surprised to see it either although I am disappointed.
I would tolerate all the risks of no deal, including economic disruption, Corbyn and even eventual rejoining, over abject national humiliation just so they can make an example of the UK. Because all of that would be our choice, not theirs.
A lot of others will feel likewise.
May has a tin ear. Chequers was already only a starting point as far as the EU27 was concerned.
Yesterday was not a humiliation or insult, it was merely reality of having trashed our friendships with the 27 countries.
And where’s your criticism of the EU27 and their “tin ear”?
Oh, that’s right. You haven’t got any. Because you’re so myopically opposed to Brexit you can’t or won’t see any.
All the reports recently were of how the EU27 recognised the need to ‘help’ and ‘save’ May to make those last concessions by adopting a change of tone and language. And this is how they think you do that?
It’s an absolute insult and will harden opinion on both sides to both of their detriment.
I find it simply astonishing that there’s no level of behaviour that the EU would descend to that you wouldn’t refuse to criticise.
No, but the EU27 approach has always been clear and has been publicly stated many times.Ala Carte was not on the menu.
Norway is possible, and Canada is possible, but not a mix. We have to decide.
I have favoured a hard Brexit since July 2016, and consistently criticised the government for failing to prepare for it. My only shift has been to now favour a #peoplesvote once such a deal is clear. Even No Deal requires a Minimal Deal.
The more masochistic approaches being advocated here for no deal (aka cutting off your nose to spite your face) are very much being driven by the heart not head, unless we want to destroy the UK economy and break up the UK during the next five years. I would much prefer a tilt towards EFTA / EEA (still "leaving" the last time I checked) which has private support at a minimum across the HoC. If the Govt can't get fhat through (because of the ERG / Corbyn managing to quell this within Labour) then you are then forced to delay A50 and have a referendum on EFTA / EEA versus no deal.
May should fight very dirty. That’s how international negotiations go when it’s high stakes.
Threaten to put EU defence needs at the bottom of the list for the UK’s overstretched armed forces, hint that GCHQ have more pressing intelligences priorities, that all funding and support for the EU’s missions in the Mediterranean Sea will be withdrawn, that the City of London will force EU companies and businesses to register and regulate them accordingly, explain that the UK will have more pressing global priorities and EU workers will be the bottom of the list for visas and have no benefits.
Fight dirty. Very dirty. And mean it. That’s how you get a deal. Make them feel just how hard and nasty a geostrategic mistake no-deal would be for them for years and years.
You seem very upset, why?
The government got it’s diplomacy wrong. It sent the PM on to confirm and present an agreement that wasn’t there. It’s a mistake, but hardly the end of the world. Something has to change to avoid no deal. What, how and who is unclear
I’m f*cking furious.
Divorce is hard. People get hurt. Remember it was us that asked for it. We must take responsibility.
Indeed. And I have no problem with that.
You continue to be one of the posters I respect the most on this site: you’re a man who is thoughtful, reasonable and not afraid to speak your own mind or honestly listen to those of others.
That’s very easy to say, but it doesn’t put bread on the table. No-one is making an example of the UK. We have a politically inept Prime Minister trying to secure a deal she made impossible because of the red lines she drew in order to curry favour with the Tory right. This is an entirely self-inflicted wound.
Yep - agree almost entirely. I give May a bit of credit in that I think without those red lines she might be gone already - easy to forget her position was previously very weak. Now she needs to find a way to wriggle out of them.
Whilst the politically engaged may be taking it a bit personally, I doubt most people really care much about this latest non-development. They'll judge the end result on its merits.
This entire dynamic and outcome has been visible since June, when the ERG effectively won the struggle within the Tory party, between it and the vastly more marginalised Grieve/ Soubry / Clarke faction.
May is still trying to square the impossible, and the outcome will still be a shift to a parliamentary vote, a plebiscitary vote, or both.
May should fight very dirty. That’s how international negotiations go when it’s high stakes.
Threaten to put EU defence needs at the bottom of the list for the UK’s overstretched armed forces, hint that GCHQ have more pressing intelligences priorities, that all funding and support for the EU’s missions in the Mediterranean Sea will be withdrawn, that the City of London will force EU companies and businesses to register and regulate them accordingly, explain that the UK will have more pressing global priorities and EU workers will be the bottom of the list for visas and have no benefits.
Fight dirty. Very dirty. And mean it. That’s how you get a deal. Make them feel just how hard and nasty a geostrategic mistake no-deal would be for them for years and years.
You seem very upset, why?
The government got it’s diplomacy wrong. It sent the PM on to confirm and present an agreement that wasn’t there. It’s a mistake, but hardly the end of the world. Something has to change to avoid no deal. What, how and who is unclear
I’m f*cking furious.
Divorce is hard. People get hurt. Remember it was us that asked for it. We must take responsibility.
Indeed. And I have no problem with that.
You continue to be one of the posters I respect the most on this site: you’re a man who is thoughtful, reasonable and not afraid to speak your own mind or honestly listen to those of others.
That’s kind. Thanks. The thing that troubles me this morning is where we go from here. Everyone has boxed themselves in to the extent that for there to be an agreement someone has to back down. Skilled politicians can manage that. But there is such clumsiness on both side, the only path that seems possible is the no deal option. And worse still there are people on both sides that want it and are prepared to undermine an agreement for which time is almost gone.
I hope Nick and Richard are right, but the writing is on the wall and 10m high.
I see we have got diverted into boys toys again. Mike’s piece is important. It suggests that for all the hysteria of yesterday the market doesn’t think that the probabilities have changed at all. This strongly supports @Nick’s analysis that this is a part of the way that the EU does business.
What I think is different is the genuine anger on the part of May yesterday. She may well make a Brexiteer yet.
May has no choice politically now but to make a very hard, defiant and combative anti-EU speech. In public.
Time to fight back.
Yes, why not take self-harm to the logical extreme?
She’s just been publicly humiliated and insulted. She has no choice.
You just don’t get the politics of this. No British Prime Minister can tolerate treatment like that and it’s astonishing so many Remainers on here (and elsewhere) are cheering them on, though not all I hasten to add, and I can’t say I’m surprised to see it either although I am disappointed.
I would tolerate all the risks of no deal, including economic disruption, Corbyn and even eventual rejoining, over abject national humiliation just so they can make an example of the UK. Because all of that would be our choice, not theirs.
A lot of others will feel likewise.
I see little cheering. National humiliation was always going to be one consequence of Brexit. We voted to make ourselves more irrelevant, less influential and worse off.
Nah, National humiliation by foreign powers (in this case, the EU) is a choice they’ve decided to make because they want to make an example of the UK and publicly bring it to heel.
We don’t have to (and shouldn’t) choose that. We should choose self-respect and walk away.
Yes, it will be hard. The alternatives are worse.
That’s very easy to say, but it doesn’t put bread on the table. No-one is making an example of the UK. We have a politically inept Prime Minister trying to secure a deal she made impossible because of the red lines she drew in order to curry favour with the Tory right. This is an entirely self-inflicted wound.
Just to be absolutely clear: there is no prospect of bread not being on the table. Even if the WTO didn’t exist or any free trade arrangement in the world. The worst that could happen is a rise in prices to account for supply chain disruption whilst we adjust.
I respectfully disagree with the rest. The EU absolutely want to make an example of the UK for political reasons and it’s the only explanation for their behaviour yesterday.
Nah, National humiliation by foreign powers (in this case, the EU) is a choice they’ve decided to make because they want to make an example of the UK and publicly bring it to heel.
We don’t have to (and shouldn’t) choose that. We should choose self-respect and walk away.
Yes, it will be hard. The alternatives are worse.
How have the EU humiliated us? Specifically?
The EU have a clear and unambiguous stance on the integrity of the EEA. They have not wavered on that stance, offering even a hint that they would break this red line at any point. Despite this the cretins in the Conservative Party insisted they would. Because we are BRITAIN and they NEED us more than we need them. We WILL have our RED WHITE AND BLUE cake and they will be grateful to give it to us. GREAT Britain Uber bloody Alles.
And what happens? We have made repeated attempts to push the EU way beyond their red line to breech the integrity of the EEA. And been repeatedly politely denied. We are only "humiliated" having wasted months arguing over which colour icing we would apply to the cake first and have finally woken up to the fact that there will be no cake.
The Conservative Party negotiation of Brexit is the national humilation. The worst planned, managed and executed negotiation imaginable, so that we now find ourselves with months to go SHOCKED and APPALLED that the EU position hasn't changed and that we're actually less important than we thought we were.
Oh dear. All ranty and shouty.
Are you the guy who posts comments on YouTube videos as well?
Why is the NI border only a UK problem, not a joint one?
It’s not really a UK problem at all, we would be quite content to pretend it’s there and work with technology to combat smuggling - much as we do now.
It’s a massive problem for the EU though, because they want their external border to *look* like an international border, with fences and checkpoints.
We really should call their bluff on it now, make it clear that it’s no deal and that they’d better start digging holes for the fenceposts.
But don't they have an open border with Switzerland, for example, without any apparent problems? There are a series of technical issues to overcome and co-operation to put in place but the solution to this will not be a part of the UK effectively remaining a part of the SM when the rest leaves.
Why is the NI border only a UK problem, not a joint one?
It’s not really a UK problem at all, we would be quite content to pretend it’s there and work with technology to combat smuggling - much as we do now.
It’s a massive problem for the EU though, because they want their external border to *look* like an international border, with fences and checkpoints.
We really should call their bluff on it now, make it clear that it’s no deal and that they’d better start digging holes for the fenceposts.
I'd always thought it was the UKIP/Tory Right who got excited about strong border, checkpoints etc........the EU is about not having borders - hence Schengen, SEA, freedom of movement - its us who voted leave who want to bring in borders
This entire dynamic and outcome has been visible since June, when the ERG effectively won the struggle within the Tory party, between it and the vastly more marginalised Grieve/ Soubry / Clarke faction.
May is still trying to square the impossible, and the outcome will still be a shift to a parliamentary vote, a plebiscitary vote, or both.
The Tory Remain camp is not what it was - ex PMs, a couple of Nottinghamshire MPs and Hezza..
May should fight very dirty. That’s how international negotiations go when it’s high stakes.
Threaten to put EU defence needs at the bottom of the list for the UK’s overstretched armed forces, hint that GCHQ have more pressing intelligences priorities, that all funding and support for the EU’s missions in the Mediterranean Sea will be withdrawn, that the City of London will force EU companies and businesses to register and regulate them accordingly, explain that the UK will have more pressing global priorities and EU workers will be the bottom of the list for visas and have no benefits.
Fight dirty. Very dirty. And mean it. That’s how you get a deal. Make them feel just how hard and nasty a geostrategic mistake no-deal would be for them for years and years.
You seem very upset, why?
The government got it’s diplomacy wrong. It sent the PM on to confirm and present an agreement that wasn’t there. It’s a mistake, but hardly the end of the world. Something has to change to avoid no deal. What, how and who is unclear
I’m f*cking furious.
Divorce is hard. People get hurt. Remember it was us that asked for it. We must take responsibility.
Indeed. And I have no problem with that.
You continue to be one of the posters I respect the most on this site: you’re a man who is thoughtful, reasonable and not afraid to speak your own mind or honestly listen to those of others.
I feel for you Casino - yesterday on hearing the news I was fuming, and I was less willing to accept Chequers than you.
This morning I’ve resolved that the only way forward to is keep negotiating.
But, as you say, no more fluffiness. Go for a simple FTA, make arrangements for the city to regulate EU businesses that rely on it, visas for more than holidays (after offering citizenship to those here now), build our own satellites, reduce Corp tax to 10%, reduce tarriffs etc
May should fight very dirty. That’s how international negotiations go when it’s high stakes.
Threaten to put EU defence needs at the bottom of the list for the UK’s overstretched armed forces, hint that GCHQ have more pressing intelligences priorities, that all funding and support for the EU’s missions in the Mediterranean Sea will be withdrawn, that the City of London will force EU companies and businesses to register and regulate them accordingly, explain that the UK will have more pressing global priorities and EU workers will be the bottom of the list for visas and have no benefits.
Fight dirty. Very dirty. And mean it. That’s how you get a deal. Make them feel just how hard and nasty a geostrategic mistake no-deal would be for them for years and years.
The only benefit of this approach I can see would be to make Brexiteers feel better. That is a substantial benefit for TM personally, and perhaps she will do something like a tough-sounding speech.
As far as I can see - the way out of this situation for May is to abandon her red line on the customs union. I guess also that's made slightly easier if she gets a few headlines first about how tough she is, standing up to Brussels etc.
May has to resign rather than abandon her red line on a customs union (or get fired). To the extent she personally has a mandate, it comes from the 2017 general election - where that was a manifesto pledge she made.
The UK contributes a lot to Europe (between 20-25% of its economic and geopolitical weight, and more militarily) and we should make them feel it.
Brexit means Brexit.
Stop exaggerating. The UK (hopefully just E&W) leaving the EU is no great loss to it.
How was CR exaggerating? He was stating facts. How the EU leaders managed to hold on to their jobs despite losing the second/third biggest economic area is beyond me. In any democracy the leadership would have resigned.
I see we have got diverted into boys toys again. Mike’s piece is important. It suggests that for all the hysteria of yesterday the market doesn’t think that the probabilities have changed at all. This strongly supports @Nick’s analysis that this is a part of the way that the EU does business.
What I think is different is the genuine anger on the part of May yesterday. She may well make a Brexiteer yet.
May has no choice politically now but to make a very hard, defiant and combative anti-EU speech. In public.
Time to fight back.
Yes, why not take self-harm to the logical extreme?
She’s just been publicly humiliated and insulted. She has no choice.
You just don’t get the I’m surprised to see it either although I am disappointed.
I would tolerate all the not theirs.
A lot of others will feel likewise.
I see little cheering. National humiliation was always going to be one consequence of Brexit. We voted to make ourselves more irrelevant, less influential and worse off.
Nah, National humiliation by foreign powers (in this case, the EU) is a choice they’ve decided to make because they want to make an example of the UK and publicly bring it to heel.
We don’t have to (and shouldn’t) choose that. We should choose self-respect and walk away.
Yes, it will be hard. The alternatives are worse.
That’s very easy to say, but it This is an entirely self-inflicted wound.
Just to be absolutely clear: there is no prospect of bread not being on the table. Even if the WTO didn’t exist or any free trade arrangement in the world. The worst that could happen is a rise in prices to account for supply chain disruption whilst we adjust.
I respectfully disagree with the rest. The EU absolutely want to make an example of the UK for political reasons and it’s the only explanation for their behaviour yesterday.
Yes, we will not literally starve to death. I was talking metaphorically. However, the consequence of what you propose is that people will lose their jobs, public services will be cut further, living standards will decline and the UK will be internationally isolated. I have no doubt that some people will be prepared to accept all that, but I am not sure most would.
The explanation for what happened yesterday lies in the promises made by Tory Brexiteers during the referendum and May’s red lines.
This entire dynamic and outcome has been visible since June, when the ERG effectively won the struggle within the Tory party, between it and the vastly more marginalised Grieve/ Soubry / Clarke faction.
May is still trying to square the impossible, and the outcome will still be a shift to a parliamentary vote, a plebiscitary vote, or both.
The Tory Remain camp is not what it was - ex PMs, a couple of Nottinghamshire MPs and Hezza..
Yes. The impossibility I was referring to was the demands of the ERG and the demands of business. This is what Theresa cannot square.
Although those older style, overt pro-Europeans are a tiny minority in the Tory party nowadays, business-friendly pragmatists who say very little about Europe, in public, are present in very large numbers in the Tory party. These are the modern Tory "Remainers" I mentioned below - very different from Liberal Democrat and Labour remainers. These are the people who could cause an irreparable split in the Tory party between now and next March if May goes for an all-out adversarial approach.
May should fight very dirty. That’s how international negotiations go when it’s high stakes.
Threaten to put EU defence needs at the bottom of the list for the UK’s overstretched armed forces, hint that GCHQ have more pressing intelligences priorities, that all funding and support for the EU’s missions in the Mediterranean Sea will be withdrawn, that the City of London will force EU companies and businesses to register and regulate them accordingly, explain that the UK will have more pressing global priorities and EU workers will be the bottom of the list for visas and have no benefits.
Fight dirty. Very dirty. And mean it. That’s how you get a deal. Make them feel just how hard and nasty a geostrategic mistake no-deal would be for them for years and years.
Ah, the Tantrum approach to Brexit.
What do you think the EU have done with Galileo, European City of Culture, exchange programmes, and collaboration in a whole host of other areas?
Even Alastair Meeks can recognise such dickishness when it occurs on the EU side. You can’t because you’re so far up Barnier’s backside you can’t see anything except the yellow stars on the blue flag. It’s only a “tantrum” when we do it, not them, because.. Brexit.
Nonsense. Fight fire with fire. They are threatening us with exclusion from all sorts of programmes and cooperation as a consequence of Brexit. We should make them feel the same. The UK contributes a lot to Europe (between 20-25% of its economic and geopolitical weight, and more militarily) and we should make them feel it.
Brexit means Brexit.
You don't fight a tantrum with a tantrum. That's just too idiots yelling at each other.
Brexit means Brexit is as moronic a slogan as it was when first aired.
That’s kind. Thanks. The thing that troubles me this morning is where we go from here. Everyone has boxed themselves in to the extent that for there to be an agreement someone has to back down. Skilled politicians can manage that. But there is such clumsiness on both side, the only path that seems possible is the no deal option. And worse still there are people on both sides that want it and are prepared to undermine an agreement for which time is almost gone.
I hope Nick and Richard are right, but the writing is on the wall and 10m high.
We absolutely can have a deal. The EU are really hoping for a deal. But like in any negotiation what the two sides want and what their opposite number can give have to meet in the middle for an actual deal to happen. Much has been made about inept Tory gobshites insulting the EU leaders bragging about easy deals - that won't make a difference because when there are several dozen leaders involved a bruised ego here and there gets assuaged by the rest.
Our problem is and remains that we are asking the EU for something they cannot give. Tory politician's jingoistic egos have pushed this they need us more than we need them nonsense so that when reality kicks in its a shock and a humiliation. Its not.
We can crash out - and the EU will protect its external border. We can exit to EEA - and formalise the "we'll still need migration" line coming from sane Tories We can stay.
These have been the only options for a long time. Where we have a problem is that Parliament seems unlikely to vote for the latter two and I expect will vote to ensure the former doesn't happen (having already rejected the options to prevent it...)
The SHOCK has been the splat of Tory Brexiteer rhetoric against the wall of reality. The next splat could be crash Brexit bringing the economy to a halt - the idea that the Tories will be in a stronger position having brought about this calamity is laughable. The only compromise left is that May agrees exit to EEA, a referendum or a no change long grass too difficult deal and survives only thanks to the opposition voting to prop her up to avoid crash Brexit.
May should fight very dirty. That’s how international negotiations go when it’s high stakes.
Threaten to put EU defence needs at the bottom of the list for the UK’s overstretched armed forces, hint that GCHQ have more pressing intelligences priorities, that all funding and support for the EU’s missions in the Mediterranean Sea will be withdrawn, that the City of London will force EU companies and businesses to register and regulate them accordingly, explain that the UK will have more pressing global priorities and EU workers will be the bottom of the list for visas and have no benefits.
Fight dirty. Very dirty. And mean it. That’s how you get a deal. Make them feel just how hard and nasty a geostrategic mistake no-deal would be for them for years and years.
You seem very upset, why?
The government got it’s diplomacy wrong. It sent the PM on to confirm and present an agreement that wasn’t there. It’s a mistake, but hardly the end of the world. Something has to change to avoid no deal. What, how and who is unclear
I’m f*cking furious.
Divorce is hard. People get hurt. Remember it was us that asked for it. We must take responsibility.
Indeed. And I have no problem with that.
You continue to be one of the posters I respect the most on this site: you’re a man who is thoughtful, reasonable and not afraid to speak your own mind or honestly listen to those of others.
I feel for you Casino - yesterday on hearing the news I was fuming, and I was less willing to accept Chequers than you.
This morning I’ve resolved that the only way forward to is keep negotiating.
But, as you say, no more fluffiness. Go for a simple FTA, make arrangements for the city to regulate EU businesses that rely on it, visas for more than holidays (after offering citizenship to those here now), build our own satellites, reduce Corp tax to 10%, reduce tarriffs etc
As a passionate unionist Scot my vote in a referendum is now no longer clear. I would say we need to think about a Eexit and not Brexit
I agree. The pathway to another independence referendum in the near future is difficult but if there ha one, I think independence will win, simply because no-one much will defend the Union. The DavidLs of Scotland make up at most 25%, far below a majority. The union alliance won't be there next time.
Funnily enough I respectfully disagree. I see no evidence of a move to independence and quite a lot of evidence that the burdens of office are finally weighing heavy on the SNP.
Tbf in this context I’d respectfully suggest that the views of FF43 & Hamiltonace (both afaicr pro EU No voters) do constitute evidence.
I see we have got diverted into boys toys again. Mike’s piece is important. It suggests that for all the hysteria of yesterday the market doesn’t think that the probabilities have changed at all. This strongly supports @Nick’s analysis that this is a part of the way that the EU does business.
What I think is different is the genuine anger on the part of May yesterday. She may well make a Brexiteer yet.
The press is generally sympathetic to TM this morning, and I think most of us would agree that she conducts herself with dignity and is keeping her nerve in the face of a really impossible situation.
The problem is that we have walked into Brexit with unreasonable expectations of a painless divorce, and it is a reasonable criticism of TM that she and her colleagues have spent 18 months attempting to square the circle instead of preparing Britain for reality.
If she'd said a year ago that this is going to be difficult; there will be disruption, higher taxes, and unpleasant but necessary compromises, but it's worth it because Britain has voted to leave and democracy must prevail, we'd be in a far stronger position. Instead, she has been preoccupied with tactics, surviving from day to day but without any visible strategy at all. We are starting to face reality but prone to blame it all on the Europeans. The problem is that we have never had a choice beyond, basically, Norway or Canada, and we've never made the hard decision about which we actually want.
Nonetheless, I think we'll get to a deal, but with more residual bitterness than was necessary. We shouldn't let it spill over into PB.
Why is the NI border only a UK problem, not a joint one?
It’s not really a UK problem at all, we would be quite content to pretend it’s there and work with technology to combat smuggling - much as we do now.
It’s a massive problem for the EU though, because they want their external border to *look* like an international border, with fences and checkpoints.
We really should call their bluff on it now, make it clear that it’s no deal and that they’d better start digging holes for the fenceposts.
But don't they have an open border with Switzerland, for example, without any apparent problems? There are a series of technical issues to overcome and co-operation to put in place but the solution to this will not be a part of the UK effectively remaining a part of the SM when the rest leaves.
Roads between the EU and Switzerland all have manned checkpoints.
We're happy to stay in the 'common market' bit of the EU, it's the political bit they added on we don't want - the bit we never voted for. The EU wanted to make it a political construct where the four freedoms became sacrosanct. Ein Volk, Ein Reich, Ein Juncker.
If the EU can persuade Varadkar to build a fence, let them get on with it.
Why is the NI border only a UK problem, not a joint one?
Of course it's a joint problem. But on the other side it's more of an Irish than an EU problem. Ireland doesn't seem to have appreciated that the EU will be quite prepared to sacrifice Irish prosperity rather than give in on its red lines - though I'm sure they will make some efforts to mitigate the damage.
Nah, National humiliation by foreign powers (in this case, the EU) is a choice they’ve decided to make because they want to make an example of the UK and publicly bring it to heel.
We don’t have to (and shouldn’t) choose that. We should choose self-respect and walk away.
Yes, it will be hard. The alternatives are worse.
How have the EU humiliated us? Specifically?
The EU have a clear and unambiguous stance on the integrity of the EEA. They have not wavered on that stance, offering even a hint that they would break this red line at any point. Despite this the cretins in the Conservative Party insisted they would. Because we are BRITAIN and they NEED us more than we need them. We WILL have our RED WHITE AND BLUE cake and they will be grateful to give it to us. GREAT Britain Uber bloody Alles.
And what happens? We have made repeated attempts to push the EU way beyond their red line to breech the integrity of the EEA. And been repeatedly politely denied. We are only "humiliated" having wasted months arguing over which colour icing we would apply to the cake first and have finally woken up to the fact that there will be no cake.
The Conservative Party negotiation of Brexit is the national humilation. The worst planned, managed and executed negotiation imaginable, so that we now find ourselves with months to go SHOCKED and APPALLED that the EU position hasn't changed and that we're actually less important than we thought we were.
Oh dear. All ranty and shouty.
Are you the guy who posts comments on YouTube videos as well?
I'm emphasising the words emphasised by Tory cabinet ministers and Theresa May.
You haven't answered the question. How specifically have the EU humilated the United Kingdon?
May should fight very dirty. That’s how international negotiations go when it’s high stakes.
Threaten to put EU defence needs at the bottom of the list for the UK’s overstretched armed forces, hint that GCHQ have more pressing intelligences priorities, that all funding and support for the EU’s missions in the Mediterranean Sea will be withdrawn, that the City of London will force EU companies and businesses to register and regulate them accordingly, explain that the UK will have more pressing global priorities and EU workers will be the bottom of the list for visas and have no benefits.
Fight dirty. Very dirty. And mean it. That’s how you get a deal. Make them feel just how hard and nasty a geostrategic mistake no-deal would be for them for years and years.
You seem very upset, why?
The government got it’s diplomacy wrong. It sent the PM on to confirm and present an agreement that wasn’t there. It’s a mistake, but hardly the end of the world. Something has to change to avoid no deal. What, how and who is unclear
I’m f*cking furious.
Divorce is hard. People get hurt. Remember it was us that asked for it. We must take responsibility.
Indeed. And I have no problem with that.
You continue to be one of the posters I respect the most on this site: you’re a man who is thoughtful, reasonable and not afraid to speak your own mind or honestly listen to those of others.
That’s kind. Thanks. The thing that troubles me this morning is where we go from here. Everyone has boxed themselves in to the extent that for there to be an agreement someone has to back down. Skilled politicians can manage that. But there is such clumsiness on both side, the only path that seems possible is the no deal option. And worse still there are people on both sides that want it and are prepared to undermine an agreement for which time is almost gone.
I hope Nick and Richard are right, but the writing is on the wall and 10m high.
I see we have got diverted into boys toys again. Mike’s piece is important. It suggests that for all the hysteria of yesterday the market doesn’t think that the probabilities have changed at all. This strongly supports @Nick’s analysis that this is a part of the way that the EU does business.
What I think is different is the genuine anger on the part of May yesterday. She may well make a Brexiteer yet.
The press is generally sympathetic to TM this morning, and I think most of us would agree that she conducts herself with dignity and is keeping her nerve in the face of a really impossible situation.
The problem is that we have walked into Brexit with unreasonable expectations of a painless divorce, and it is a reasonable criticism of TM that she and her colleagues have spent 18 months attempting to square the circle instead of preparing Britain for reality.
If she'd said a year ago that this is going to be difficult; there will be disruption, higher taxes, and unpleasant but necessary compromises, but it's worth it because Britain has voted to leave and democracy must prevail, we'd be in a far stronger position. Instead, she has been preoccupied with tactics, surviving from day to day but without any visible strategy at all. We are starting to face reality but prone to blame it all on the Europeans. The problem is that we have never had a choice beyond, basically, Norway or Canada, and we've never made the hard decision about which we actually want.
Nonetheless, I think we'll get to a deal, but with more residual bitterness than was necessary. We shouldn't let it spill over into PB.
That all sounds about right except the last bit.
I think you may be far too sanguine about a deal happening.
May should fight very dirty. That’s how international negotiations go when it’s high stakes.
Threaten to put EU defence needs at the bottom of the list for the UK’s overstretched armed forces, hint that GCHQ have more pressing intelligences priorities, that all funding and support for the EU’s missions in the Mediterranean Sea will be withdrawn, that the City of London will force EU companies and businesses to register and regulate them accordingly, explain that the UK will have more pressing global priorities and EU workers will be the bottom of the list for visas and have no benefits.
Fight dirty. Very dirty. And mean it. That’s how you get a deal. Make them feel just how hard and nasty a geostrategic mistake no-deal would be for them for years and years.
Ah, the Tantrum approach to Brexit.
What do you think the EU have done with Galileo, European City of Culture, exchange programmes, and collaboration in a whole host of other areas?
Even Alastair Meeks can recognise such dickishness when it occurs on the EU side. You can’t because you’re so far up Barnier’s backside you can’t see anything except the yellow stars on the blue flag. It’s only a “tantrum” when we do it, not them, because.. Brexit.
Nonsense. Fight fire with fire. They are threatening us with exclusion from all sorts of programmes and cooperation as a consequence of Brexit. We should make them feel the same. The UK contributes a lot to Europe (between 20-25% of its economic and geopolitical weight, and more militarily) and we should make them feel it.
Brexit means Brexit.
You don't fight a tantrum with a tantrum. That's just too idiots yelling at each other.
That is EXACTLY how we beat Enron.
People actually stood on the desk, jabbing fingers at each other.
But we got a deal.
And the wording was upheld by the House of Lords when Enron tried to wriggle out of it.
I see we have got diverted into boys toys again. Mike’s piece is important. It suggests that for all the hysteria of yesterday the market doesn’t think that the probabilities have changed at all. This strongly supports @Nick’s analysis that this is a part of the way that the EU does business.
What I think is different is the genuine anger on the part of May yesterday. She may well make a Brexiteer yet.
The press is generally sympathetic to TM this morning, and I think most of us would agree that she conducts herself with dignity and is keeping her nerve in the face of a really impossible situation.
The problem is that we have walked into Brexit with unreasonable expectations of a painless divorce, and it is a reasonable criticism of TM that she and her colleagues have spent 18 months attempting to square the circle instead of preparing Britain for reality.
If she'd said a year ago that this is going to be difficult; there will be disruption, higher taxes, and unpleasant but necessary compromises, but it's worth it because Britain has voted to leave and democracy must prevail, we'd be in a far stronger position. Instead, she has been preoccupied with tactics, surviving from day to day but without any visible strategy at all. We are starting to face reality but prone to blame it all on the Europeans. The problem is that we have never had a choice beyond, basically, Norway or Canada, and we've never made the hard decision about which we actually want.
Nonetheless, I think we'll get to a deal, but with more residual bitterness than was necessary. We shouldn't let it spill over into PB.
I agree with pretty much all of that. We should indeed have started preparation for a harder Brexit 18 months ago. The time wasted whilst searching for this special relationship with the EU has been a fantasy.
My concern, which I have been expressing this morning, is that we may end up with an even less special relationship than we might have had because of the way that both sides have conducted the negotiations. It is frustrating and although I still think the most likely outcome remains a deal its not going to be a cosy relationship going forward. I expect the percentage of our trade with the EU to fall sharply over the coming decade.
Why is the NI border only a UK problem, not a joint one?
It’s not really a UK problem at all, we would be quite content to pretend it’s there and work with technology to combat smuggling - much as we do now.
It’s a massive problem for the EU though, because they want their external border to *look* like an international border, with fences and checkpoints.
We really should call their bluff on it now, make it clear that it’s no deal and that they’d better start digging holes for the fenceposts.
But don't they have an open border with Switzerland, for example, without any apparent problems? There are a series of technical issues to overcome and co-operation to put in place but the solution to this will not be a part of the UK effectively remaining a part of the SM when the rest leaves.
Roads between the EU and Switzerland all have manned checkpoints.
I see we have got diverted into boys toys again. Mike’s piece is important. It suggests that for
What I think is different is the genuine anger on the part of May yesterday. She may well make a Brexiteer yet.
May has no choice politically now but to ack.
Yes, why not take self-harm to the logical extreme?
She’s just been publicly humiliated and insulted. She has no choice.
You just don’t get the politics e.
May has a tin ear. Chequers was s.
And where’s your criticism of the EU27 and their “tin ear”?
Oh, that’s right. You haven’t got any. Because you’re so myopically opposed to Brexit you can’t or won’t see any.
All the reports recently were of how the EU27 recognised the need to ‘help’ and ‘save’ May to make those last concessions by adopting a change of tone and language. And this is how they think you do that?
It’s an absolute insult and will harden opinion on both sides to both of their detriment.
I find it simply astonishing that there’s no level of behaviour that the EU would descend to that you wouldn’t refuse to criticise.
+1
Nothing we do is right or even reasonable, everything they do is ok. See the reports of supposedly an 'aggressive ' article from May being beyond the pale for them, while nothing they say of course is anything more than acceptable and just what happens in a negotiation. People take hard stances on red lines? Remarkable. But only ok if it's the EU.
I don't advocate us throwing a tantrum about it as I I don't see what it achieves and only the tone of the dismissal really surprised; therefore I think the UK needs to, very quickly, alter position. No point trying to push anything Chequers related (though I expect after yesterday's tone well get leaks from the eu about how there's still hope it just needs work on the key areas).
Possible scenario? May tells conference her approach failed due to EU intransigence therefore we will now need a much harder deal (If she pushes capitulation she's ousted and due to the time someone gets anointed to do it instead). That might scrape through the party even if the commons is a problem; we know the EU will accept harder options as they are clear there are no soft ones.
If that approach fails (and even it probably requires May to go)the gov says it is no deal, and we see if that leads to a surge for referendum or GE.
As Jonathan has noted something has to change here and the EU do not appear to be bluffing do they won't. Either we kowtow, or we try a harder deal. Neither are liked, but the Tories cannot do the former, and not enough switch to remain or GE until the latter is tried.
Another Remainer Tory MP, Stephen Crab, on R4 saying yesterday’s EU behaviour pushing him to “the quicker we’re out the better”
At the risk of stating the bleeding obvious, Stephen Crabb is a Conservative MP.
The most adamant "burn the EU to the ground" posters on here over the past day - Big G, Casino Royale, and (via Twitter) the sainted SeanT - have also been dyed-in-the-wool Conservatives.
It's not surprising that Tories are angry when the Tory Prime Minister is publicly humiliated. It's entirely understandable - commendable even. I'm not going to postulate about how these posters are wrong because if I were in their shoes I'd probably be doing the same.
But that doesn't mean that the 80% of voters who aren't tribal Tories will feel the same way. Yesterday's events make Tories more inclined to back the Tory policy, yes. But I see no sign that they'll precipitate a wider shift from Continuity Remain to Hard Leave.
The UK contributes a lot to Europe (between 20-25% of its economic and geopolitical weight, and more militarily) and we should make them feel it.
Brexit means Brexit.
Stop exaggerating. The UK (hopefully just E&W) leaving the EU is no great loss to it.
Another of those examples trying to say the EU is soooo powerful our leaving matters not, which basically says the EU are fools, which they are not. They can get by fine without us, but it's simple fact we are a big European country, our loss to them means they take a hit. It never meant they'd give anything in a negotiation, there are important politics and institutional issues, but that's not the same as not caring. That's why they want a deal too, because losing the UK chaoticslly would be a greater loss than losing it in a deal. It's just a deal May be too hard to arrange.
We are leaving. If a deal comes, it will be at the last minute because that is the way the EU works.
Despite all the fire and fury, Remainers need to accept that - and most do. The fanatical few are defending a Wonga - type institution. In 1975, the small print may have mentioned a united European state, but that's where it stayed - the small print. The advertising was for a cuddly 'common market', a trade deal, an Economic community, not the 6000 percent interest rate.
Anyway, If that changed, we'd always have a vote in any major change. But we didn't, did we? I was in my mid-twenties then and assumed most politicians tried to tell the truth.
How naïve I was.
If by some miracle I was asked to vote again …. I pity any canvasser appearing at my door. You may think that's a little over the top, but by comparison with many others, I'm a dove.
Why is the NI border only a UK problem, not a joint one?
It’s not really a UK problem at all, we would be quite content to pretend it’s there and work with technology to combat smuggling - much as we do now.
It’s a massive problem for the EU though, because they want their external border to *look* like an international border, with fences and checkpoints.
We really should call their bluff on it now, make it clear that it’s no deal and that they’d better start digging holes for the fenceposts.
But don't they have an open border with Switzerland, for example, without any apparent problems? There are a series of technical issues to overcome and co-operation to put in place but the solution to this will not be a part of the UK effectively remaining a part of the SM when the rest leaves.
Roads between the EU and Switzerland all have manned checkpoints.
There’s no barrier there, but there are two manned customs houses as well as the technology.
FWIW I think a purely technological solution will work just fine in Ireland - the majority of cross-border goods traffic is from a few large companies and local farmers, the small-time smugglers of petrol, cigarettes and VAT can be addressed as they are now with intelligence-led policing. The issue is that there has to be the will on both sides to do this, whereas at the moment one side sees the border as a negotiating lever rather than something to be worked through co-operatively.
Why is the NI border only a UK problem, not a joint one?
It’s not really a UK problem at all, we would be quite content to pretend it’s there and work with technology to combat smuggling - much as we do now.
It’s a massive problem for the EU though, because they want their external border to *look* like an international border, with fences and checkpoints.
We really should call their bluff on it now, make it clear that it’s no deal and that they’d better start digging holes for the fenceposts.
But don't they have an open border with Switzerland, for example, without any apparent problems? There are a series of technical issues to overcome and co-operation to put in place but the solution to this will not be a part of the UK effectively remaining a part of the SM when the rest leaves.
Roads between the EU and Switzerland all have manned checkpoints.
Not something that I think anyone would enjoy building in Ireland.
They really don't. Try driving from the Jura across to France. The only sign of the border is a notice saying "If you have something to declare, go to the nearest manned crossing at ..." The main crossings are manned, the minor ones aren't.
The problem is that whereas nobody really cares if a few Swiss people pop over to buy some wine, Britain is big enough that a porous border will be exploited big time.
Another Remainer Tory MP, Stephen Crab, on R4 saying yesterday’s EU behaviour pushing him to “the quicker we’re out the better”
At the risk of stating the bleeding obvious, Stephen Crabb is a Conservative MP.
The most adamant "burn the EU to the ground" posters on here over the past day - Big G, Casino Royale, and (via Twitter) the sainted SeanT - have also been dyed-in-the-wool Conservatives.
It's not surprising that Tories are angry when the Tory Prime Minister is publicly humiliated. It's entirely understandable - commendable even. I'm not going to postulate about how these posters are wrong because if I were in their shoes I'd probably be doing the same.
But that doesn't mean that the 80% of voters who aren't tribal Tories will feel the same way. Yesterday's events make Tories more inclined to back the Tory policy, yes. But I see no sign that they'll precipitate a wider shift from Continuity Remain to Hard Leave.
There may be some instinctive rallying effect temporarily I think, in response to the predictable type headlines, but not a decisive shift.
But a shift in the Tories is possible and that's important, because we need to shift tack somehow, and they are the most likely. They switch to hard leave, the EU may even agree, and then we see if the commons let's it happen. It might not, everyone else will vote against and Tory remainer rebels might be enough.
If it fails we've crossed off hard leave and Chequers as options. The other options probably require a referendum or GE and those are tried next.
May probably needs to go to get the ball rolling though. She can hardly argue she can go for a harder leave now given her approach.
Except, Mum has a treaty obligation under Article 50 to feed us. So if not crisps, mum then what? Surely you wouldn't fail your parental duties and let us starve?
The EU have a clear and unambiguous stance on the integrity of the EEA. They have not wavered on that stance, offering even a hint that they would break this red line at any point. Despite this the cretins in the Conservative Party insisted they would. Because we are BRITAIN and they NEED us more than we need them. We WILL have our RED WHITE AND BLUE cake and they will be grateful to give it to us. GREAT Britain Uber bloody Alles.
And what happens? We have made repeated attempts to push the EU way beyond their red line to breech the integrity of the EEA. And been repeatedly politely denied. We are only "humiliated" having wasted months arguing over which colour icing we would apply to the cake first and have finally woken up to the fact that there will be no cake.
The Conservative Party negotiation of Brexit is the national humilation. The worst planned, managed and executed negotiation imaginable, so that we now find ourselves with months to go SHOCKED and APPALLED that the EU position hasn't changed and that we're actually less important than we thought we were.
This seems a fair assessment of the current situation.
Why is the NI border only a UK problem, not a joint one?
It’s not really a UK problem at all, we would be quite content to pretend it’s there and work with technology to combat smuggling - much as we do now.
It’s a massive problem for the EU though, because they want their external border to *look* like an international border, with fences and checkpoints.
We really should call their bluff on it now, make it clear that it’s no deal and that they’d better start digging holes for the fenceposts.
But don't they have an open border with Switzerland, for example, without any apparent problems? There are a series of technical issues to overcome and co-operation to put in place but the solution to this will not be a part of the UK effectively remaining a part of the SM when the rest leaves.
Roads between the EU and Switzerland all have manned checkpoints.
Not something that I think anyone would enjoy building in Ireland.
They really don't. Try driving from the Jura across to France. The only sign of the border is a notice saying "If you have something to declare, go to the nearest manned crossing at ..." The main crossings are manned, the minor ones aren't.
The problem is that whereas nobody really cares if a few Swiss people pop over to buy some wine, Britain is big enough that a porous border will be exploited big time.
You may well be right about the smaller alpine crossings, not been there for a while and stuck to the main roads which all had checkpoints.
I also hope you’re right in your comments yesterday, that we’ll have a few weeks of everyone appearing to shout loudly past each other before a deal does indeed get agreed.
You may well be right about the smaller alpine crossings, not been there for a while and stuck to the main roads which all had checkpoints.
Last time I was there (couple of years ago, on the Rhine) the secondary roads had checkpoints but they didn't appear to be manned, while the foot/bike crossings had nothing at all.
The EU have a clear and unambiguous stance on the integrity of the EEA. They have not wavered on that stance, offering even a hint that they would break this red line at any point. Despite this the cretins in the Conservative Party insisted they would. Because we are BRITAIN and they NEED us more than we need them. We WILL have our RED WHITE AND BLUE cake and they will be grateful to give it to us. GREAT Britain Uber bloody Alles.
And what happens? We have made repeated attempts to push the EU way beyond their red line to breech the integrity of the EEA. And been repeatedly politely denied. We are only "humiliated" having wasted months arguing over which colour icing we would apply to the cake first and have finally woken up to the fact that there will be no cake.
The Conservative Party negotiation of Brexit is the national humilation. The worst planned, managed and executed negotiation imaginable, so that we now find ourselves with months to go SHOCKED and APPALLED that the EU position hasn't changed and that we're actually less important than we thought we were.
This seems a fair assessment of the current situation.
Not really since it essentially says while the EU has clear red lines how dare we have red lines well. It is surely the point of a negotiation to test how red each other's red lines are. May definitely miscalculated how red the EUs was, but that doesn't mean they are angels by comparison if they miscalculated how red ours are - And the reported bafflement at our position on Ireland lends that some credence.
We will now see if May as bluffing and thus if the EU called it correctly. I suspect they are closer to doing so, but it's still a gamble.
Except, Mum has a treaty obligation under Article 50 to feed us. So if not crisps, mum then what? Surely you wouldn't fail your parental duties and let us starve?
But our friends told us that Mum would have other Mums knocking on her door demanding we be given a Walkers six-pack of our choice.
Why is the NI border only a UK problem, not a joint one?
It’s not really a UK problem at all, we would be quite content to pretend it’s there and work with technology to combat smuggling - much as we do now.
It’s a massive problem for the EU though, because they want their external border to *look* like an international border, with fences and checkpoints.
We really should call their bluff on it now, make it clear that it’s no deal and that they’d better start digging holes for the fenceposts.
But don't they have an open border with Switzerland, for example, without any apparent problems? There are a series of technical issues to overcome and co-operation to put in place but the solution to this will not be a part of the UK effectively remaining a part of the SM when the rest leaves.
Roads between the EU and Switzerland all have manned checkpoints.
Comments
Norway is possible, and Canada is possible, but not a mix. We have to decide.
I have favoured a hard Brexit since July 2016, and consistently criticised the government for failing to prepare for it. My only shift has been to now favour a #peoplesvote once such a deal is clear. Even No Deal requires a Minimal Deal.
You continue to be one of the posters I respect the most on this site: you’re a man who is thoughtful, reasonable and not afraid to speak your own mind or honestly listen to those of others.
https://twitter.com/RobbieGibb/status/1043014560356032515?s=20
Why is the NI border only a UK problem, not a joint one?
Whilst the politically engaged may be taking it a bit personally, I doubt most people really care much about this latest non-development. They'll judge the end result on its merits.
May is still trying to square the impossible, and the outcome will still be a shift to a parliamentary vote, a plebiscitary vote, or both.
This allows proper planning for WTO terms on both Islands, plans that should have started 27 months ago. Blind Brexit.
It’s a massive problem for the EU though, because they want their external border to *look* like an international border, with fences and checkpoints.
We really should call their bluff on it now, make it clear that it’s no deal and that they’d better start digging holes for the fenceposts.
I hope Nick and Richard are right, but the writing is on the wall and 10m high.
I respectfully disagree with the rest. The EU absolutely want to make an example of the UK for political reasons and it’s the only explanation for their behaviour yesterday.
Are you the guy who posts comments on YouTube videos as well?
This morning I’ve resolved that the only way forward to is keep negotiating.
But, as you say, no more fluffiness. Go for a simple FTA, make arrangements for the city to regulate EU businesses that rely on it, visas for more than holidays (after offering citizenship to those here now), build our own satellites, reduce Corp tax to 10%, reduce tarriffs etc
We squandered that negotiating position by our own failure to prepare, or to consider it a possibility, despite being the default.
The explanation for what happened yesterday lies in the promises made by Tory Brexiteers during the referendum and May’s red lines.
Although those older style, overt pro-Europeans are a tiny minority in the Tory party nowadays, business-friendly pragmatists who say very little about Europe, in public, are present in very large numbers in the Tory party. These are the modern Tory "Remainers" I mentioned below - very different from Liberal Democrat and Labour remainers. These are the people who could cause an irreparable split in the Tory party between now and next March if May goes for an all-out adversarial approach.
That's just too idiots yelling at each other.
Brexit means Brexit is as moronic a slogan as it was when first aired.
Our problem is and remains that we are asking the EU for something they cannot give. Tory politician's jingoistic egos have pushed this they need us more than we need them nonsense so that when reality kicks in its a shock and a humiliation. Its not.
We can crash out - and the EU will protect its external border.
We can exit to EEA - and formalise the "we'll still need migration" line coming from sane Tories
We can stay.
These have been the only options for a long time. Where we have a problem is that Parliament seems unlikely to vote for the latter two and I expect will vote to ensure the former doesn't happen (having already rejected the options to prevent it...)
The SHOCK has been the splat of Tory Brexiteer rhetoric against the wall of reality. The next splat could be crash Brexit bringing the economy to a halt - the idea that the Tories will be in a stronger position having brought about this calamity is laughable. The only compromise left is that May agrees exit to EEA, a referendum or a no change long grass too difficult deal and survives only thanks to the opposition voting to prop her up to avoid crash Brexit.
Theresa May. The Tory Ramsay MacDOnald.
Who needs who most?
The problem is that we have walked into Brexit with unreasonable expectations of a painless divorce, and it is a reasonable criticism of TM that she and her colleagues have spent 18 months attempting to square the circle instead of preparing Britain for reality.
If she'd said a year ago that this is going to be difficult; there will be disruption, higher taxes, and unpleasant but necessary compromises, but it's worth it because Britain has voted to leave and democracy must prevail, we'd be in a far stronger position. Instead, she has been preoccupied with tactics, surviving from day to day but without any visible strategy at all. We are starting to face reality but prone to blame it all on the Europeans. The problem is that we have never had a choice beyond, basically, Norway or Canada, and we've never made the hard decision about which we actually want.
Nonetheless, I think we'll get to a deal, but with more residual bitterness than was necessary. We shouldn't let it spill over into PB.
At a minimum they look like
http://media.gettyimages.com/photos/cars-queue-at-the-border-crossing-between-france-and-switzerland-on-picture-id468328565
Not something that I think anyone would enjoy building in Ireland.
We're happy to stay in the 'common market' bit of the EU, it's the political bit they added on we don't want - the bit we never voted for. The EU wanted to make it a political construct where the four freedoms became sacrosanct. Ein Volk, Ein Reich, Ein Juncker.
If the EU can persuade Varadkar to build a fence, let them get on with it.
But on the other side it's more of an Irish than an EU problem. Ireland doesn't seem to have appreciated that the EU will be quite prepared to sacrifice Irish prosperity rather than give in on its red lines - though I'm sure they will make some efforts to mitigate the damage.
You haven't answered the question. How specifically have the EU humilated the United Kingdon?
I think you may be far too sanguine about a deal happening.
People actually stood on the desk, jabbing fingers at each other.
But we got a deal.
And the wording was upheld by the House of Lords when Enron tried to wriggle out of it.
My concern, which I have been expressing this morning, is that we may end up with an even less special relationship than we might have had because of the way that both sides have conducted the negotiations. It is frustrating and although I still think the most likely outcome remains a deal its not going to be a cosy relationship going forward. I expect the percentage of our trade with the EU to fall sharply over the coming decade.
I think we could live with that.
Nothing we do is right or even reasonable, everything they do is ok. See the reports of supposedly an 'aggressive ' article from May being beyond the pale for them, while nothing they say of course is anything more than acceptable and just what happens in a negotiation. People take hard stances on red lines? Remarkable. But only ok if it's the EU.
I don't advocate us throwing a tantrum about it as I I don't see what it achieves and only the tone of the dismissal really surprised; therefore I think the UK needs to, very quickly, alter position. No point trying to push anything Chequers related (though I expect after yesterday's tone well get leaks from the eu about how there's still hope it just needs work on the key areas).
Possible scenario?
May tells conference her approach failed due to EU intransigence therefore we will now need a much harder deal (If she pushes capitulation she's ousted and due to the time someone gets anointed to do it instead). That might scrape through the party even if the commons is a problem; we know the EU will accept harder options as they are clear there are no soft ones.
If that approach fails (and even it probably requires May to go)the gov says it is no deal, and we see if that leads to a surge for referendum or GE.
As Jonathan has noted something has to change here and the EU do not appear to be bluffing do they won't. Either we kowtow, or we try a harder deal. Neither are liked, but the Tories cannot do the former, and not enough switch to remain or GE until the latter is tried.
The most adamant "burn the EU to the ground" posters on here over the past day - Big G, Casino Royale, and (via Twitter) the sainted SeanT - have also been dyed-in-the-wool Conservatives.
It's not surprising that Tories are angry when the Tory Prime Minister is publicly humiliated. It's entirely understandable - commendable even. I'm not going to postulate about how these posters are wrong because if I were in their shoes I'd probably be doing the same.
But that doesn't mean that the 80% of voters who aren't tribal Tories will feel the same way. Yesterday's events make Tories more inclined to back the Tory policy, yes. But I see no sign that they'll precipitate a wider shift from Continuity Remain to Hard Leave.
Despite all the fire and fury, Remainers need to accept that - and most do. The fanatical few are defending a Wonga - type institution. In 1975, the small print may have mentioned a united European state, but that's where it stayed - the small print. The advertising was for a cuddly 'common market', a trade deal, an Economic community, not the 6000 percent interest rate.
Anyway, If that changed, we'd always have a vote in any major change. But we didn't, did we? I was in my mid-twenties then and assumed most politicians tried to tell the truth.
How naïve I was.
If by some miracle I was asked to vote again …. I pity any canvasser appearing at my door. You may think that's a little over the top, but by comparison with many others, I'm a dove.
FWIW I think a purely technological solution will work just fine in Ireland - the majority of cross-border goods traffic is from a few large companies and local farmers, the small-time smugglers of petrol, cigarettes and VAT can be addressed as they are now with intelligence-led policing. The issue is that there has to be the will on both sides to do this, whereas at the moment one side sees the border as a negotiating lever rather than something to be worked through co-operatively.
https://twitter.com/tompeck/status/1043038249671843840
The problem is that whereas nobody really cares if a few Swiss people pop over to buy some wine, Britain is big enough that a porous border will be exploited big time.
But a shift in the Tories is possible and that's important, because we need to shift tack somehow, and they are the most likely. They switch to hard leave, the EU may even agree, and then we see if the commons let's it happen. It might not, everyone else will vote against and Tory remainer rebels might be enough.
If it fails we've crossed off hard leave and Chequers as options. The other options probably require a referendum or GE and those are tried next.
May probably needs to go to get the ball rolling though. She can hardly argue she can go for a harder leave now given her approach.
I also hope you’re right in your comments yesterday, that we’ll have a few weeks of everyone appearing to shout loudly past each other before a deal does indeed get agreed.
We will now see if May as bluffing and thus if the EU called it correctly. I suspect they are closer to doing so, but it's still a gamble.