The Consequences of Brexit [part 4]

[Carlinate 10]

You cannot have a hard Brexit + a deal. They are incompatible.

 

You will have noticed that much of the politics within Europe is about fighting off the winds of change. Politicians love nothing more than maintaining the status quo. This dynamic will certainly feed into Brexit negotiations. Both the UK and the EU will want to maintain the status quo as much as possible to minimise disruptions. This means replicating our current EU arrangements to the furthest extent possible. If this is achieved then you've struck a deal. The fact both parties have now entered into negotiations would mean both sides are committed to striking a deal and I'm pretty confident this is now the only option going foreword.

 

A 'no deal' scenario would mean a substantial departure from the status quo. ie no negotiations from the outset with no intention of striking a deal. This is what a "hard" Brexit would look like and there's very little chance of this happening. In fact the only way of delivering a 'no deal' outcome would be for the hardcore Euroskeptic MPs to seize control of the Tory party. I don't see that happening anytime soon.

 

A no deal Brexit would be the result of a total breakdown of negotiations and would result in WTO trade tariffs being imposed which would not be a good thing.

 

Whilst it could happen it isn't in anyone's best interest, except perhaps for one or two people like George Soros playing the market.

 

Therefore I would expect a deal to be reached, a deal that leaves us worse off, and with virtually no future influence on the direction the EU takes from now on.

 

Agree about politicians wanting to retain the status quo.

 

Why do you think that we were offered AV as an alternative to FPTP and not PR?

 

PR was reintroduced to Northern Ireland in 1973 in order to ensure fair representation for the minority culture and try to halt the violence.

 

So PR was being successfully used in a part of the UK for over thirty years yet wasn't on offer to the rest of the country, why?

 

Because it is the fairest and most democratic voting system as yet invented and it is impossible to argue the merits of FPTP against PR.

 

Our politicians want to keep a not fit for purpose system because it suits them and so offered AV, another flawed system, as the alternative.

 

These are the people that Brexit will return control to, a bunch of self serving second and third rate expense fiddling clowns.

 

Brilliant.

[samssong 10]

Well if you want chaos and for us to plunge into a recession then that would be the way to go. You dont really care about the economic welfare of the UK though do you.

 

---------- Post added 20-06-2017 at 22:42 ----------

 

 

Chaos has already come ,get out now.

 

---------- Post added 21-06-2017 at 07:28 ----------

 

Like a stuck record, playing Nigel Farage's greatest hits.

 

Nobody believes any of that crap any more.

My post has nothing to do with whatever Nigel Farage has said, past or present.

[I1L2T3 10]

Chaos has already come ,get out now.

 

---------- Post added 21-06-2017 at 07:28 ----------

 

My post has nothing to do with whatever Nigel Farage has said, past or present.

 

I listened to his LBC show the other night and you're just trotting out the same populist rhetoric and flimsy arguments. It's not helpful now we have to actually negotiate Brexit.

[silentP 10]

Like a stuck record, playing Nigel Farage's greatest hits.

 

Nobody believes any of that crap any more.

 

I don't believe much of the opposing argument either but it does make for entertainment early morning.

[Fogey 10]

Every time we turn on the TV or read a news paper we are being told by people in pin striped suits just how complicated it is for us to leave the European Union . Just tonight we have had the governor of the bank of England spouting off how we all will be worse off when the deal is done .

 

On top of that we have politicians from all parties bowing and scraping to the unelected Parliament in Brussels practically begging them to not charge us billions to be free of their corrupt union.

 

Why ?????? I ask . why not just do what the working people of England and Wales have told them to do and tell these unelected European bandwaggoners to get stuffed .

 

The so called union is finished due to open borders letting all and sundry flood Europe and by doing so this has lead to the situation that we find ourselves in today with terrorism in every major Country due to impossible to police border controls.

 

If Ireland and Scotland think that they will be better of in the so called Union then let them .

Let Northern Ireland unite and let Scotland go there own way .

 

As for the majority who voted to leave.!!!!! then do as we say and just leave, tell the pin stripped brigade to stop talking and if not then let us get leaders that will actually do as the majority in our Country has instructed them to do.

 

unelected Parliament in Brussels, - HELLO! its elected! Thats why Nigel Farage is involved, because people in the UK elected him, - hello! is there anybody there? hello?

[I1L2T3 10]

Farage always gets a bit evasive when the divorce settlement is mentioned. Guess he knows that without it his EU pension won't be funded.

 

So come on Nige let's tell them to stuff their divorce bill, and you can take a bullet for decent people everywhere by forgetting about your EU pension pot.

[Cyclone 10]

You cannot have a hard Brexit + a deal. They are incompatible.

 

You will have noticed that much of the politics within Europe is about fighting off the winds of change. Politicians love nothing more than maintaining the status quo. This dynamic will certainly feed into Brexit negotiations. Both the UK and the EU will want to maintain the status quo as much as possible to minimise disruptions. This means replicating our current EU arrangements to the furthest extent possible. If this is achieved then you've struck a deal. The fact both parties have now entered into negotiations would mean both sides are committed to striking a deal and I'm pretty confident this is now the only option going foreword.

 

A 'no deal' scenario would mean a substantial departure from the status quo. ie no negotiations from the outset with no intention of striking a deal. This is what a "hard" Brexit would look like and there's very little chance of this happening. In fact the only way of delivering a 'no deal' outcome would be for the hardcore Euroskeptic MPs to seize control of the Tory party. I don't see that happening anytime soon.

 

Except the EU have made it extremely clear that we don't get to maintain the current arrangement. Not the bits we want anyway.

 

---------- Post added 21-06-2017 at 09:03 ----------

 

My post has nothing to do with whatever Nigel Farage has said, past or present.

 

And yet it's like you're channelling him.

So either you know that what you're saying is nonsense, or you believe what you're saying. Either way, that's scary in an adult.

[Hairyloon 10]

Either way, that's scary in an adult.

 

You've spelled "addled" wrong.

[L00b 441]

We have to stop getting our knickers in a twist over the nitty gritty of Article 50.

Says the person with perhaps not enough understanding of civil law jurisdictions and systems:

Article 50 is a product of EU law. EU law is very different to other forms of law (eg. constitutional law).

Article 50 is part and parcel of the bedrock of EU constitutional law that is the TFEU.

 

It's an Article of it: it doesn't get more 'constitutional' than that.

Political objectives lie at the heart of of EU law. If that same political authority (May, Merkel, Macron) decide article 50 is not a helpful tool they will simply continue on regardless because if the parties involved are committed to achieving a settlement then there are no deadlines. You don't jeopardize the outcome of a settlement for the sake of an artificial deadline. You'd be playing a game of crystal maze otherwise!

None of Merkel, Macron or the UK have any choice about the March 2019 timescale: it's a statutory timescale set in a piece of civil law, and there is no statutory get-out associated with it, in the same or another article of the TFEU, aside from the possibility of extending it through common consent of all the EU27 in advance of the unextended deadline: there is no 'fudge' about the intent of the drafters, of the legislation, of <...> like there is in common law jurisdictions.

 

That is why the political objectives of both sides have been in play since March 2017, and have to be reached by March 2019.

 

That is why the clock plays for the EU, not the UK...and so favours Barnier/Juncker/Merkel/Macron/etc. over May/Davis/Johnson/Fox/etc. in the balance of power: because the EU has far less to lose with the UK out on its a55 with no deal, than the UK does.

 

Merkel knows it. Macron knows it. Barnier knows it. Davis knows it. May knows it. Everybody and their dog knows it, but the most obtuse, deluded or die-hard Leavers.

@L00b I know where you're coming from. Lawyers require clarity. Politicians do not.

We've had clarity since before the referendum. Because the law is what it is and, until and unless it is changed into a different law (by amendment or new Statutes implementing a 'deal'), how it operates by default (through simple application of existing provisions) dictates what happens: simple, readily-flowchartable progress/outcomes.

 

In the IP sphere, we made our case in plain and clear black and white, no Project Fear about it whatsoever, long before the referendum. Admittedly it was such an obscure and niche aspect of the whole thing, it was hardly ever going to matter one iota. But I certainly called for the Remain and Leave campaigns to extend the exercise to as many other sectors of the UK economy as possible before the referendum, to get as clear a composite picture as possible of what consequences were at stake practically.

 

Irrespective, even if we'd been listened to, and the exercise extended, as we were "experts", we'd probably have been branded either Project Fear, or experts not to be trusted or listened to, or such similar anti-intellectual rethoric.

 

In the end, the masses preferred the populist siren calls, their elected representatives preferred to drop their collective kegs before the public opinion to save their political careers, and now Article 50's been triggered and there is no climbing back from it, lest some very obscure British constitutional t's and i's haven't been properly crossed and dotted and could still be used to backtrack from the cliff edge. But those won't be Merkel/Macron/the EU's prerogative to invoke. Whatsoever. It will be the Brit's prerogative only. Maybe Ms Miller will step unto the breach once more, and try and save the Brits from themselves again? Here's hoping anyway.

 

The EU would prefer a deal, but it doesn't need one. The UK needs that deal, or it faces standing on the global trading scene like the proverbial naked first born come 1st April 2019. The EU's ultimate negotiating lever/ace in the hole lies in not agreeing a deal in good time by end March 2019 (much earlier actually, to ensure that the deal gets ratified by EU27 Parliaments etc. in good time by April 1st, 2019). The EU doesn't need to assert that lever, Davis knows it all too well, and I think he's finally understood that Barnier is not bluffing, the EU is absolutely ready and willing to let the UK take itself out of the EU with no deal. That's why Davis dialled down the hard Brexit rethoric, and caved in about the divorce on day one, and also why you're going to see him caving in time and again as soon as positions are expressed.

 

Heck, he'll be caving in just to get a transitional deal and period (which still won't grant the UK any better of a hand for later negotiations), never mind 'the' deal

 

EDIT: casting my mind back to Charles de Gaulle passport control this weekend...I think every Leave voter should be made to go through it at least once (arriving or departing, same situation), through the non-EU passport queue (whilst looking longingly at the 'EU passports' queue), to sample a little bit of the Brexit delights to come

Edited June 21, 2017 by L00b
link to Art.50 opinion

[samssong 10]

Except the EU have made it extremely clear that we don't get to maintain the current arrangement. Not the bits we want anyway.

 

---------- Post added 21-06-2017 at 09:03 ----------

 

 

And yet it's like you're channelling him.

So either you know that what you're saying is nonsense, or you believe what you're saying. Either way, that's scary in an adult.

Personal arn't you.

[Hairyloon 10]

Will you give it a rest with your fact based reporting and reasoned analysis?

The people are emotional, ignorant and misinformed: that is the fundamental basis of our democratic system.

 

Which reminds me: whatever happened to Unbeliever?

[truman 10]

unelected Parliament in Brussels, - HELLO! its elected! Thats why Nigel Farage is involved, because people in the UK elected him, - hello! is there anybody there? hello?

 

Don't let facts get in the way of a rant...