The Brexit aftermath thread

[Slant]

This is a worthwhile read, it summarizes something I've said oh so many times in this thread:

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/b...on-t-3vdjkz90t

Author: Simon Nixon, chief leader writer of The Times

By far the most jaw-dropping revelation so far to have emerged in the extracts from David Cameron’s memoirs was buried in his account of the build-up to the Brexit referendum. Recalling his efforts to persuade Boris Johnson to back Remain, the former prime minister noted that “Boris had become fixated on whether we could pass legislation that said UK law was ultimately supreme over EU law”. He duly dispatched Sir Oliver Letwin on a “nightmare round of shuttle diplomacy” between Mr Johnson and the government’s lawyers to see if a way could be found to address his concerns by domestic legislation.

“But those lawyers were determined to defend the purity of European law and kept watering down the wording.” According to Mr Cameron, this epitomised the problem at the heart of the UK’s relationship with the EU: “Our officials were determined to play by the rules.”

What makes this extract extraordinary is that it confirms that six years after he became prime minister and just weeks before he gambled Britain’s membership of the EU in a referendum, he didn’t understand how it works. Indeed, it appears he still hasn’t grasped that the supremacy of EU law in the areas over which the EU has competence is not a bug but the essential feature without which it couldn’t work.

It is the purity of EU rules and the willingness of member states to play strictly by them that has enabled open borders and frictionless trade across the Continent. Without common rules consistently enforced by a common court, the customs union and single market in whose defence Mr Cameron sacrificed his political career would not exist.

His ignorance of the fundamental principles of how the EU operates is testimony to the enduring hold of one of the most powerful narratives in British politics. This idea that rules are for other people, that the EU’s insistence on the integrity of its legal order is an alien and unnecessary continental obsession, continues to hold an unshakeable grip over a large swathe of Britain’s political class, despite all that has happened over the past three years. Theresa May suffered from the same delusion, proclaiming in her notorious speech at the October 2016 Conservative party conference that she would end the jurisdiction of the European Court of Justice in Britain, apparently oblivious to the fact that she had just committed herself to taking Britain out of the EU single market and customs union until this was pointed out to her by Sir Ivan Rogers, Britain’s then-ambassador to the EU. She spent the next two and a half years being schooled in legal reality.

Now Boris Johnson is prime minister and the whole cycle has started again. He took office in July, apparently determined to test the narrative to destruction, insisting that by threatening to leave the EU without a deal on October 31 he could convince Brussels to drop its insistence on the purity of EU law and a requirement that everyone play by the rules. Now, with only 43 days to go, we are invited to believe that Mr Johnson is, in fact, keen to reach a deal. Yet from the hazy details that Downing Street has been prepared to reveal so far, there is no sign that the government has been able to identify legally workable “alternative arrangements” that would avoid the need for the Irish backstop in the existing withdrawal agreement. Even if Mr Johnson were to agree that Northern Ireland should remain subject to all EU agricultural rules, or indeed all single market rules for trade in goods, this still wouldn’t be enough to replace the backstop. Without a commitment to a common customs area and alignment on VAT, border checks would still be necessary. Nor is it plausible that the EU would allow the Northern Irish assembly a veto over new EU rules.

What is at issue here is not just the fate of Brexit but the credibility of the British state. Narratives don’t just matter in domestic politics, they matter to markets, too. One of the strongest and most enduring market narratives over many decades is that Britain is a highly stable, well-governed country. Yet Brexit risks putting that narrative in question. When it is clear that three prime ministers in succession have reached the highest office with a flawed understanding of how the basic framework underpinning a G7 country’s most important commercial and security relationships works it is clear something has gone profoundly awry in Britain’s political system.

How can it be that a country with no shortage of expertise in both the public and private sector can find itself led by politicians with so little understanding of how the global trading system works? Perhaps Michael Gove spoke more truth than anyone realised when he said during the referendum campaign that Britain had had enough of experts. As yet another team of British negotiators head to Brussels to try to negotiate a new relationship with the EU based on the same misplaced expectations, it seems that Brexit did not so much cause a crisis in the British state as reveal one.

That bodes ill regardless of how Brexit plays out in the weeks and months ahead. Xavier Bettel, Luxembourg’s prime minister, was certainly undiplomatic in his outburst after his meeting with Mr Johnson this week, but there is little doubt that his frustration with Britain is widely shared, not just across the EU. A loss of confidence in our political class and institutions risks translating into a loss of confidence in Britain generally. The problem is that once a narrative takes hold, it can be very hard to shift, as we have learnt. After all, there is one thing we can say for sure: even if Britain does end up leaving the EU without a deal and the “reasonable worst case scenario” outlined in the government’s Yellowhammer report turns out to be true, Mr Johnson will never admit that he got it wrong. Like Mr Cameron, he will pin the blame on the lawyers who defended the purity of EU law and insisted on playing by the rules.

It is also why it's probably for the best to not grant an extension and let them crash out on October 31st.

[Monster Hunter]

Wrong again, but I guess if you don't read newspapers its not your fault

Well yea, the printed press is only useful as emergency toilet paper. But the word on the street is the Daily mail and telegraph don't like any brown people so I'm assuming that's all brown people

- - - Updated - - -

Oh you mean the NHS they said could get £350m if the u.k left the E.U? The one that was a lie, tricking people to vote leave?

No I mean the 1.8billion he's pledge as part of his anti austerity package he outlined in one of his first appearances as PM in parliament, ofc there's yet to be a queen's speech so untill then it's not official goverment policy.

Look I don't like his stance on brexit, I'm a remainer, but he's making the right domestic policy noises and every politician should be given a chance to make good on there promise, calling him lier is correct he has lied but its double edged sword as all the other pm hopefuls have lied and been caught out multiple times

[dribbles]

Well yea, the printed press is only useful as emergency toilet paper. But the word on the street is the Daily mail and telegraph don't like any brown people so I'm assuming that's all brown people

You assume wrong. The Daily Mail and Telegraph are mainstream papers representing the majority of moderate and progressive UK people like me.

You want to see racists and anti brown people I see Ursula is currently boasting about her new team. Anything wrong with this picture? A certain segment of EU society unrepresented maybe?

https://twitter.com/vonderleyen/stat...65507451146246

[Monster Hunter]

You assume wrong. The Daily Mail and Telegraph are mainstream papers representing the majority of moderate and progressive UK people like me.

You want to see racists and anti brown people I see Ursula is currently boasting about her new team. Anything wrong with this picture? A certain segment of EU society unrepresented maybe?

https://twitter.com/vonderleyen/stat...65507451146246

They still likly engage in he same shit jurno tactics as the gardian and the BBC of clipping quotes and videos to try and remove any context to incite sections of the population, Most our media needs prosecuting for incitement over brexit, the behaviour of leave and remain has been an embarisment.

But that sums up brexit, a shit show from start to end. I mean it started as a fuck up because the vote wasn't even leave v remain, it was some unknown form of leave v David Camerons's new deal that opted us out of the bits most hard eu supporters wanted.... So yea.... There wasn't evean a real remain option.

[szechuan]

You assume wrong. The Daily Mail and Telegraph are mainstream papers representing the majority of moderate and progressive UK people like me.

You mean Conservatives?

[Monster Hunter]

Homosexuality Legalization would not have been passed by a conservative government, there was no support for gay rights in the conservative party at the time.

Cameron's gay marriage legislation was voted against by a majority of the conservative party and he had to get support from Labour to get it passed, this was half a century later.



- - - Updated - - -



No it was a bill sponsored by Labour's Leo Abse, Arran was the co-sponsor, idiot.

Brief history lesson for you, since you seem to be twelve years old. The conservative have always hated gays, most still do, but it isn't politically acceptable for them to say so. Perhaps you'd care to look up clause 28 for an indication of just how fucking progressive the tories were on gay rights.

Homosexual discrimination was essentially ended under New Labour when civil marriages became law. Afterwards, as a purely cynical gesture, David Cameron made numerous meaningless pro-gay gestures in a bid to de-toxify the party and mostly failed due to the fact the party publicly revealed its bigotry by voting AGAINST the measure that you cited in the conservative party's defense.

That's how much of a retard you are, you actually cited a perfect example of anti-gay bigotry without even knowing it.

I'd add: to show how committed Cameron actually was to gay rights, explain for us why don't you what the actual difference was between his measure and the existing civil partnership legislation was. Because I don't think you know...not just about this but about anything.

Sounds like you 1. Didn't read my list of things the Conservatives have done for gay rights over the years 2. Don't care because your a prejudice bigot who's been drinking to much American coolaid and 3. Is extreamly but hurt that the UK left dosnt have the same ammunition the US left has.

All of which seems like a you problem, if you want to to ignore history for your own fantasy that's fine but don't get so irrste when people point and quote that actual record not just your conjecture.

There are 19 currently openly gay conservative MP's all of which you manage to insult just by opening you mouth. And a life time of work by conservative MP's working cross party as well as conservative peers to advance gay rights in the UK. Stick to your American toxic politics kido your not mature enough to hold an opinion on the UK.

[mvaliz]

https://twitter.com/Collabblues/stat...22291000537088

That shit is hilarious.

Saving you all the extra step in needing to google-translate his link:

EDIT: nevermind - Flag Emojis derp this outdated forum's code. >_<

Basically, it shows the countries flags in 1950 forming the base for the EU, and England saying "WTF is this shit?"

((At least I believe that's what's being shown. I'll admit my history of the EU is somewhat shaky...))

[Slant]

Saving you all the extra step in needing to google-translate his link:

EDIT: nevermind - Flag Emojis derp this outdated forum's code. >_<

Basically, it shows the countries flags in 1950 forming the base for the EU, and England saying "WTF is this shit?"

((At least I believe that's what's being shown. I'll admit my history of the EU is somewhat shaky...))

It's a bit more than that, it's the entire history until today. That's just the beginning.

In other news:

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...-a9113451.html

The EU shoots down the most recent proposal, which is basically May's deal without the backstop. To the surprise of absolutely no one outside the UK.

[Dizzeeyooo]

The UK "non-papers" seem to be going down well.

Breaking: UK negotiators have proposed a selective approach to an all-Ireland agrifood zone, no alignment on customs or industrial goods, and no "legally operable" solutions this side of a Withdrawal Agreement, according to well-placed sources.

Officials briefed on the UK "non-papers" as well as the talks between the Brexit Secretary Steve Barclay and EU chief negotiator Michel Barnier, have described the proposal as a "backward step" and "totally insane".

According to one official, the UK proposals do not meet ANY of the three objectives of the backstop which are: avoiding a hard border, protecting the all-island economy and preserving North-South cooperation.

The UK is proposing that an all-Ireland SPS (agrifood + animal health) zone be aligned under EU rules only selectively. Among the exemptions negotiators have sought are EU labelling rules.

The UK papers insist that there would be no North-South alignment on customs or industrial goods, as per the backstop. Instead there would be trusted traders, technology, checks away from the border.

EU sources say this would require wholesale derogations from EU customs law. Nor would the MaxFac package be legally operable. These proposals would remain concepts which would be fleshed out during a transition period.

"All of it is quite sobering," said source. "Its cherry picking on [agri-food] rules, regulatory controls on industrial goods done away from the border, with extensive derogations. None of this legally operable. It is currently only concepts to be worked out during the transition. In essence, the UK is not only wanting to slice and dice the backstop, they want to slice and dice one of the bits that has been sliced and diced".

One member state said the UK had gone a few steps forward by proposing an all-Ireland SPS zone, but had now gone ten steps back.

[ranzino]

Downing Street’s secrecy over its Brexit proposals has caused a fresh rupture in the negotiations in Brussels, a leaked email reveals, as EU officials warned that the talks are “going backwards”.
The row was sparked by a British demand that the EU’s negotiating team treat a long-awaited cache of documents outlining the UK’s latest ideas as “Her Majesty’s government property”.
Whitehall told the European commission team that the three “confidential” papers should not be distributed to Brexit delegates representing the EU’s 27 other member states.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics...oposals-secret

i wonder who Whitehall thinks the commission talks to and get its green light to agree ?

[Kallisto]

Not brexit related but at the same time not 100% removed either. It looks like the Labour civil war is heating up again.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-49776100

Bid to oust deputy leader (essentially put in place to balance out Corbyn) Tom Watson. Which could end up with a counter coup lead by Watson against Corbyn.

[Kallisto]

Literally, what the rubbery fuck are you talking about.

The truth is that it's exactly the opposite of what you state: the actions of Jon Lansman and his Momentum wank buddies will ensure that Labour will not win the next GE.

Fucking Marxist entryists.

Labour should find a way to tell momentum to fuck off since they're marxist push is basically going to make the party more unpopular than Michael Foot's longest suicide note in political history.

Yes yes I know someone will scream Blairite blah blah. But you know rather have a centre left labour leader that wins elections with the parties biggest wins than a racist anti semetic fuck far left nutter that failed against open goal May to win an election then is so far behind "I can't win shit." Bojo and is anti EU but is too much of a pussy to just come out and say it because he knows it will lose him votes and 99% of the party is against it so forces the party to sit on the fence than either fall on his sword or just come out for leave.

[draykorinee]

Oh my, people are still believing the NHS is getting a financial boost?

Even IF, and that's a big if, they do increase spending on the NHS, a decade of austerity will still mean we're worse off than we were before.

I'm a nurse, I have seen firsthand the destructive nature of the tory policies.

[Acidbaron]

The NHS more money fantasy,

Leaving the EU will instantly mean less GDP, the NHS gets a percentage of how much the government makes.
Maybe eventually the economy will get a boost after leaving the EU, however we already know the US wants to dismantle the NHS and open the market for private insurers. The US being proposed as one of the key partners in the eyes of brexiteers being lovedrunk on the postive brexit fantasy.

But let's assume you even get more money, the West EU has an issue recruiting staff for the healthcare industry and the UK is bleeding those immigrants left and right and is very unattractive because it puts EU citizens in a state of limbo regarding their personal rights inside the UK, and that's me not even bringing up the apartheid view brexiteers have when it comes to rights for non-brits.

It is also not the EU that is closing down practices but your own government that has been dismantling NHS service left and right due to poor political choices, the one consistent thing when it comes to National and International politics from the UK, incompetence.

[draykorinee]

Let's not forget the usual racist nonsense about not being able to get a doctors appointment because of immigrants etc...

Yeah sorry Dr Patel from India couldn't fit in enough slots for you, maybe you can see the Filipino nurse instead?

[Slant]

Hmm, something to worry about. If those Brexiteers actually do get into bed with the US for personal profit, which is almost guaranteed to be the case if you ask me, it'll be super difficult to unwind that relationship at a later stage. A United Kingdom in utter dependence and aligned with the US legal system is 100% incompatible with everything the EU does.

Just to keep in mind for the future. This could be more painful than people realise. I'm talking 10-20 years down the road here.

[Mormolyce]

I think UKIP 'winning' the referendum has been far more damaging than losing ever could have been for them.

They got the one thing they wanted (ish) and when they needed to come up with some other policy position they floundered, the started bickering like spoilt children, they had literal fights with one another and then actively started courting out right racists like Tommy Robinson. Now they are pretty much irrelevant.

Pretty much, I mean that was Cameron's plan really. Single issue parties are vulnerable to that kind of thing.

I guess in a way his plan worked, I mean it took him, his party and the entire country down with it, but still.

- - - Updated - - -

And as I have argued, it would most certainly not. Even the most favourable towards Remain polls still showed very substantial support for Brexit. If the Referendum was lost in favour of Remain Farage would still be able to come forward with 45%+ and very reasonably claim he has a mandate to keep fighting for Brexit. If anything considering that the Tories were divided in how they campaigned for Brexit, Farage would be a danger for any Tory representatives in constituencies that voted for Brexit.

Correct, even if it was 55/45 it would never have silenced the leave campaigners, in the same way a 52/48 hasn't silence remain.

It was a vanity project, nothing else.

Maybe, but I suspect a loss would've taken a lot of wind out of their sails, like the Scottish independence referendum. It didn't die but it lost most of its momentum (thought Brexit ironically almost got it rolling again).

But yeah, I don't know if it was anything more than a short term tactical decision on Cameron's part, I mean after all it blew up in his face so it was obviously a bad idea.

- - - Updated - - -

https://twitter.com/Collabblues/stat...22291000537088

That shit is hilarious.

It was funny, or at least what I could decipher from Google translate :P

[Slant]

It was funny, or at least what I could decipher from Google translate :P

We can enjoy it in its full English glory now, since apparently the Twitter thread blew up a bit:

https://twitter.com/Collabblues/stat...55625413373955

[ranzino]

https://www.theguardian.com/law/2019...on-prorogation

"Boris Johnson would have no option but to recall MPs to Westminster if the supreme court rules he misled the Queen, senior legal sources told the Observer yesterday.
There is a growing belief in the legal community that the court will find against the government when it hands down its momentous verdict on Johnson’s decision to prorogue parliament.
The prospect of the court finding against the prime minister has left the UK heading towards a “constitutional eruption of volcanic proportions”, according to another senior legal figure who asked not to be named. He said he also believed the case would go against the government..."


so it is like "lot of steam in the kitchen, but the soup is already smelling bad" ?
incoming week will be interesting....

[Slant]

so it is like "lot of steam in the kitchen, but the soup is already smelling bad" ?
incoming week will be interesting....

If the court decides against the Government, it would be an important bit of the UK's checks and balances to kick in. Something we haven't quite seen so far.